Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Pier and Harbour Provisional Orders (No. 2) Bill,

Land Drainage (Ouse) Provisional Order Bill,

Salford Provisional Order Bill,

Leicester Fire Brigade Provisional Order Bill,

Read a Second time, and committed.

WEMYSS AND DISTRICT WATER PROVISIONAL ORDER BILL,

"to confirm a Provisional Order under the Private Legislation Procedure (Scotland) Act, 1899, relating to Wemyss and District Water," presented by Colonel Sir JOHN GILMOUR; read the First time; and ordered (under Section 9 of the Act) to be read a Second time upon Thursday, 25th June, and to be printed. [Bill 196.]

ROYAL SANITARY INSTITUTE (PETITIONS).

Lieut.-Colonel FREMANTLE: I beg to present to the House three humble petitions from the Royal Sanitary Institute, on behalf of the three special Bills which they hope that this House will pass into law this Session. The three Bills are the Births and Deaths Registration Bill, the Open Spaces Bill, and the Therapeutic Substances Bill.

Oral Answers to Questions — CHINA (DISTURBANCES).

Mr. WINDSOR: 19.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty how many naval ratings and marines have been landed at Shanghai; what will be their duties; and
whether the cost will be met by the foreign municipality?

The FIRST LORD of the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Bridgeman): The Commander-in-Chief, China, reported on the 9th June that 340 British naval ratings and marines had been landed at Shanghai. Their duties are to protect the lives and property of British subjects. The cost is borne by Navy Votes.

Mr. BUCHANAN: When did the people of Shanghai become so valuable and the people at home not so valuable, seeing that no measure is taken to protect the lives of poor people in this country from starvation?

Colonel DAY: 9.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what specific steps have been and are being taken in the disturbed areas in China, in which the recent disturbances have taken place, to protect the lives of unarmed British nationals?

Mr. A. M. SAMUEL (Parliamentary Secretary, Overseas Trade Department): Chinese forces are co-operating with the civil authorities in the maintenance of order, and, where necessary, naval vessels are despatched to centres of disturbance and local volunteer forces are mobilised. 1,100 troops of various nationalities, other than Chinese, were landed at Shanghai, and an additional 800 kept in reserve. It is hoped that the situation there will soon permit of the withdrawal of part, if not all, of the forces. Measures which might appear provocative are carefully avoided. His Majesty's Chargé d'Affaires at Pekin has been instructed to report immediately should he consider any further specific measures desirable.

Colonel DAY: Can the hon. Gentleman tell us the approximate number of unarmed British nationals there are there?

Mr. SAMUEL: It would be impossible to state offhand, but if the hon. and gallant Member presses the point, of course I will make inquiries.

Sir HARRY BRITTAIN: In the meantime would it not help to bring about the desired result if every Member of this House would do his best to support the Government of the day in a difficult situation?

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 16.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether any British subjects have lost their lives during the disturbance at Shanghai; and whether the available forces of all foreign Powers are co-operating with our own to restore order in the disaffected area?

Mr. SAMUEL: I have learnt with great regret of the murder of one British subject and the wounding of another. In reply to the last part of the question, the disturbances at Shanghai are primarly a matter for the civil authorities, but the available forces of all the foreign Powers are co-operating to lend support where necessary.

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL NAVY.

ROYAL NAVAL RESERVE (RETIRING GRATUITY).

Mr. WALTER BAKER: 20.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether he is aware that, as a result of the Jerram Committee, the Royal Fleet Reserve retiring gratuity was increased by 100 per cent. in view of the depreciation of the pound sterling; whether he is aware that a corresponding adjustment was refused in the case of the Royal Naval Reserve gratuity; and whether he will take steps to increase the gratuity of the Royal Naval Reserve in the same proportion as that of the Royal Fleet Reserve?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the ADMIRALTY (Mr. Davidson): This suggestion cannot be adopted as the circumstances of the two Forces are entirely different. The Royal Fleet Reserve retiring gratuity was increased from £50 to £100, but the annual retainer was not increased at all, whereas a substantial increase was made in the annual retainer of the Royal Naval Reserve.

Mr. BAKER: Having regard to the many anomalies which exist in regard to retiring allowances and superannuation, will a Committee of Inquiry be appointed to go into the whole of these questions?

Mr. DAVIDSON: I cannot give any undertaking, but I will consider it.

SHIPYARD WORK (THE HARTLEPOOLS).

Sir WILFRID SUGDEN: 21.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, in view of the high percentage of ex-service
men employed in the shipbuilding yards of the Hartlepools, and of the large number of unemployed shipyard workers there, he will give facilities for repairs or building of vessels of suitable types required and to be included in the building programme of his Department?

Mr. DAVIDSON: The claims of shipbuilding and repairing firms in the Hartlepool district will receive full consideration if and when opportunity arises to allocate repair work or new construction within the capacity of Admiralty contractors in that area.

Sir W. SUGDEN: Is it not a fact that at the present time there is certain work that can be done by our people in the Hartlepools more efficiently than in any other section of the East Coast shipbuilding yards?

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: Will the hon. Gentleman have regard to the fact that there are other yards with an equal percentage of unemployment; and may I take it that there will be no unfair discrimination in allocating orders?

Mr. DAVIDSON: Certainly.

Sir ROBERT THOMAS: Is it not a fact that there is no lack of ship repairing work, but that ships are going from this country to the Continent for repair, owing to the prices being so much lower and owing to lack of organisation on this side?

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a question for the Admiralty.

CANTEEN SERVICE.

Major Sir BERTRAM FALLE: 22.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether recommendations which are made by the Fleet representatives at the quarterly meetings of the headquarters' naval canteen committees possess any executive power; and, if not, whether steps will be taken to ensure that due attention is paid to recommendations carried by a majority of the representatives, in order that much desired and necessary improvements may be effected?

Mr. DAVIDSON: The Admiralty has no reason to doubt that the recommendations do receive the full and sympathetic consideration of the authorities of the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes, and that they are given effect to, whenever practicable.

Sir B. FALLE: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that there is considerable dissatisfaction at the recent management of this committee, and will he inquire into it?

The HON. BARONET: 23.
also asked whether the Naval Administrative Committee of the Navy, Army, and Air Force Institutes is still responsible for the administration of the naval canteen service or whether responsibility is now vested in the office of commercial manager under direction of the general manager; and, if so, whether such change was made with Admiralty approval?

Mr. DAVIDSON: The Naval Administrative Committee automatically ceased to function as the canteen service developed on normal peace lines, and at the present time the naval section of the Navy, Army and Air Force Institutes is in charge of a naval accountant officer acting under the general manager. The arrangement has the full approval of the Admiralty.

Sir B. FALLE: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that it causes very considerable dissatisfaction, and is not well received by the men?

The HON. BARONET: 24.
further asked whether the absence of advisory officers from the 22nd meeting of the headquarters naval canteen committee is an indication that in the future the various commanders-in-chief will not be represented; and whether, in view of the acknowledged success of the system of close co-operation between officers and men in all matters affecting the welfare of the lower deck, orders will be issued to ensure that these officers shall attend in the future?

Mr. DAVIDSON: In response to a resolution passed by the Fleet representatives at the meeting referred to, the Admiralty have now arranged for the attendance, in future, of an officer from each of the three home ports. I may add that the attendance of these officers, who did not act in any advisory capacity, as suggested by my hon. and gallant Friend, was made optional, as verbatim reports of the proceedings at the meetings are now circulated.

BALTIC (BRITISH SQUADRON'S VISIT).

Mr. LANSBURY: 25.
asked the First Lord of the Admiralty whether, with regard to the projected visit of a British squadron to the Baltic during the present summer, he will say how many ships the squadron will consist of and what is the object of their visit; and, in view of the fact that the reported visit of a British squadron to the Baltic has caused great uneasiness among the population of Russia, will he reconsider the question?

Mr. BRIDGEMAN: The British ships now visiting the Baltic comprise the Second Cruiser Squadron of five ships and the Fifth Destroyer Flotilla of nine ships. The squadron arrived at Helsingfors on the 15th June, and will remain in the Baltic until the 3rd July. It is customary for a British squadron to visit the Baltic during the summer months, and I see no reason why any uneasiness should be caused by the cruise.

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: Can the House be informed what is the authority of the hon. Gentleman for saying that this visit of the British ships will cause uneasiness in Russia?

Mr. LANSBURY: Am I allowed to answer that question?

Mr. J. JONES: Seeing that you will not trade with Russia, why pay them friendly visits?

CIVIL STAFF.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: 26.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Admiralty the reason for the increase of the civil staff by 35 as on the 1st May, 1925, and by what date it is expected that the staff will be reduced to normal proportions?

Mr. DAVIDSON: This unusual increase is due to the temporary loan of a number of second-class draughtsmen from the dockyards to the Admiralty to deal with some design work. The rules at present governing the preparation of the staff returns are such that draughtsmen of this grade are classified as industrial staff when at the dockyards, but as headquarters, that is, non-industrial staff, when employed at the Admiralty. The staff will be reduced to normal proportions when these men return to the dockyards on the completion of this particular work.

Sir R. HAMILTON: Can the hon. Gentleman say if any definite steps are being taken to reduce this large staff at the Admiralty at the present time?

Mr. DAVIDSON: Steps are taken whenever an opportunity presents itself.

Sir R. HAMILTON: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that two years ago I was informed, in an answer in this House by his predecessor at the Admiralty, it was expected that the staff would be reduced to normal proportions at the end of 1923?

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is the hon. Gentleman aware that if a reduction of staff takes place, it will bring about tremendous hardship, and before any reduction takes place, will the Government see that there are jobs for the men, or else retain them where they are?

OFFICERS' MARRIAGE ALLOWANCE.

Mr. FENBY: 45.
asked the Prime Minister whether the Cabinet Committee appointed to consider the possibility of granting marriage allowances to naval officers has yet reported?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Baldwin): This matter is at present under consideration.

NEW NAVAL CONSTRUCTION.

Mr. FENBY: 46.
asked the Prime Minister whether the Cabinet Committee appointed to consider the question of new naval construction has yet reported; if so, whether it has reported in favour of new construction; and whether he can state the amount of the supplementary Estimate involved.

The PRIME MINISTER: The Cabinet Committee in question have not yet completed their investigations, and I am therefore not in a position to make any statement on this subject.

Oral Answers to Questions — RUSSIA.

ARMS TRAFFIC CONVENTION.

Colonel DAY: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the reason for the British proposal at the second Committee of Arms Conference at Geneva to remove Soviet Russia from the list of those countries whose adherence to the proposed convention is necessary; and
whether the British delegates at this conference supported and voted in favour of the French delegation's proposal for the suspension of the provisions of Article 3, relating to the publication of details of the importation of arms in the case of countries bordering Russia?

Mr. SAMUEL: The reason is that, Russia having declined to take part in the conference, her retention among the list of countries referred to by the hon. and gallant Member would have involved the indefinite postponement of the entry into force of the Convention. The amendment to Article 3, which was moved by the Rumanian, not the French, delegation, was supported by the British delegate.

Colonel DAY: Can the hon. Gentleman state whether the proposal made by the British delegation was inspired by any other country?

Mr. SAMUEL: I could not give an answer to that question offhand, but if the hon. and gallant Member will put it down on the Paper, I will make it my business to look into it.

RUSSIAN NATIONALS COMPENSATION CLAIMS.

Mr. J. BECKETT: 4.
asked the Secretary for Foreign Affairs whether His Majesty's Government are prepared to consider the compensation claims of Russian nationals for the damage inflicted on Russian property and nationals in the years 1918, 1919 and 1920, when Great Britain was engaged in Blockading Russia, when British troops were on Russian territory, and when Great Britain was supporting the armies led by Generals Koltchak, Denekin, and Wrangel?

Mr. SAMUEL: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply given to him on the 27th May.

RUSSIAN-ITALIAN TREATY OF COMMERCE.

Mr. MACKINDER: 8.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether he can state the provisions of the Russian-Italian Treaty of Commerce and Navigation which was approved of by the Italian Chamber on 4th June, 1925?

Mr. SAMUEL: The full text of this Treaty was published in the "Board of Trade Journal" of the 3rd April, 1924.

Oral Answers to Questions — GERMANY.

DISARMAMENT.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: 5.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs the extent of the control now being exercised by the Allies to secure the carrying out by Germany of the provisions of the Versailles Treaty as to disarmament; and whether, seeing that from the moment the Allied control is withdrawn it would take the German authorities only about one year to attain their maximum production in 1918 of guns and munitions, the Allies will continue for the present their hold of the occupied German territories along the Rhine?

Mr. SAMUEL: The Inter-Allied Military Commission of Control will remain in Germany to supervise the execution of the demands contained in the Allied Note of the 2nd of June. As regards the second part of the question, the policy of His Majesty's Government is that the Articles of the Treaty dealing with the occupation of German territory shall be strictly observed.

Commander FANSHAWE: Is the hon. Gentleman not aware that Germany is, to all intents and purposes, disarmed, and has been for a very considerable time, and does he not consider that any further occupation of German territory will only lead to irritation and possible disturbance?

Sir F. HALL: May I ask the hon. Gentleman, as representing the Government, whether we can be satisfied that the terms with regard to disarmament will be carried out?

RHINELAND MILLENARY CELEBRATIONS.

Mr. PONSONBY: 6.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs what special regulations have been issued by the Inter-Allied High Commission at Coblenz with regard to the millenary celebrations in the Rhineland, and whether any protest has been made that these regulations are an infringement of the civic and constitutional rights of the Rhineland?

Mr. SAMUEL: Special powers have been conferred on the chief representatives of the Inter-Allied Rhineland High Commission enabling them to prohibit any meeting, gathering, or assembly likely to prejudice the security of the
armies of occupation. The answer to the second part of the question is in the negative.

INDUSTRIAL CONDITIONS.

Captain WEDGWOOD BENN: 11.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether, in any negotiations with Germany, the Government have proposed among their terms that the German Government should by legislation raise the industrial standard of the German workman to a level not inferior to that prevailing in British industry?

Mr. SAMUEL: I have nothing to add to the answer returned on the 27th May to a similar question by the hon. and gallant Member.

Captain BENN: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think it would be better if, in exercising pressure on Germany, we attempted to get labour conditions improved rather than insisting on details of military armaments?

Mr. SAMUEL: I can add nothing to what has been said by my right hon. Friend. I express no opinions beyond the answer which he gave.

Captain BENN: But the answer said that the question was not opportune.

Mr. SAMUEL: I must refer the hon. and gallant Gentleman to that answer.

Oral Answers to Questions — OPIUM CONVENTION.

Mr. CAMPBELL: 10.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs which of the signatory Powers to the convention and protocols resulting from the opium conferences at Geneva have ratified the same?

Mr. SAMUEL: I have no information that any ratifications have yet been deposited.

Oral Answers to Questions — TANGIER (SPANISH OPERATIONS).

Captain BENN: 12.
asked the Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs whether his attention has been called to the fact that soldiers from the Spanish army again operated within the Tangier zone by way of ambush of a defenceless caravan; that five women were left wounded by the river bed; that women and flocks and herds are
being carried off from the international zone by Spanish forces; and what action he is taking in the matter?

Mr. SAMUEL: I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the answer given on the 15th June to the hon. Member for Brightside (Mr. Ponsonby).

Captain BENN: Have the Government made any protest against what impartial observers have stated is a barbarous outrage?

Oral Answers to Questions — INTERNATIONAL LABOUR ORGANISATION.

Mr. ERSKINE: 27.
asked the Minister of Labour the cost to the British Government of the International Labour Organisation at Geneva?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Sir Arthur Steel-Maitland): The amount of the Estimate for the current financial year for the British Government contribution to the International Labour Organisation is £30,000.

Mr. ERSKINE: Is it not a fact that Britain's share is out of all proportion to her representation?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The representation is not based in any way on the measure of contribution.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Can the right hon. Gentleman assure the House that the annual cost is not likely to be much increased in the near future?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: It was due largely to the exertions of the British representative there that very considerable economy was secured in the present year, and that without affecting the efficiency of the organisation in any respect, and the House may rest assured that the whole policy of the Government is to be as economical as possible there, as in any other matters, without in any way decreasing efficiency.

Mr. SEXTON: Is it not a fact that the existence of the Labour Organisation at Geneva is a great advantage to the right hon. Gentleman's own Department here?

Oral Answers to Questions — UNEMPLOYMENT.

WINTER SCHEMES.

Mr. T. THOMSON: 28.
asked the Minister of Labour what schemes the Government are prepared to put in hand during the forthcoming autumn and winter in order to afford additional opportunities of employment to the increasing numbers who are out of work?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: This is not a matter which can be dealt with adequately by way of question and answer. I propose later in the Session to make a full statement.

Mr. THOMSON: In view of the appalling increase in the number of unemployed, is it not possible for the right hon. Gentleman to make some statement at a very early date?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I understand that a further discussion is likely to be proposed, but I have only heard it so far quite informally and unofficially. An early date, however, has been asked for, for further discussion on the Vote of the Labour Ministry, and doubtless an opportunity will be given for going into it.

Mr. CONNOLLY: Can the right hon. Gentlemen tell us whether or not all of the 28 ships due for reconditioning when the Navy Estimates went through have been allocated up to the present?

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member should put that question to the Admiralty.

UNEMPLOYMENT ACT AMENDMENT BILL.

Mr. T. THOMSON: 32.
asked the Minister of Labour if, before presenting his proposed Unemployment Act Amendment Bill, he will follow the example of the Minister of Health with regard to the Government's Rating and Valuation Bill, and consult the local committees and authorities concerned, so as to secure the benefit of their knowledge and experience when drafting his proposals?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I do not think the two Measures are comparable. In any event, for reasons of which the hon. Member is no doubt fully aware, it is important that the Unemployment Insurance Bill should be passed before next October. I am afraid this would become impossible if I followed the course he suggests.

Mr. THOMSON: May I ask whether the right hon. Gentleman has ascertained, or will ascertain, from local authorities what will be the effect of leaving the present Act unamended?

Mr. J. JONES: Before the right hon. Gentleman replies, has he taken into consideration the fact that, owing to the new Rating and Valuation Bill, in certain parts of the country they are going to be considerably handicapped by the increase of local rates? In our own district at least sixpence in the £ will have to be found as a result.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I have always got the question of local rates also in my mind, and I am in constant touch with the Minister of Health in that connection.

Mr. A. V. ALEXANDER: Is it not a fact that the right hon. Gentleman has already announced that, even should he get his new Unemployment Bill, he is not going to change his present policy?

COAL MINING INDUSTRY.

Mr. SEXTON: 35.
asked the Minister of Labour if he is aware that Golborne Collieries, Lancashire, made application to St. Helens Labour Exchange for colliers; that a number were sent and one of them, Edward Baines, was refused work, though a fully qualified collier living less than three miles away, while others were taken on who lived over six miles away but, owing to the distance and there being no travelling facilities, could not go; and will he inquire why Baines was refused work?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am making inquiries into the circumstances of this case, and will communicate the result to the hon. Member.

Mr. LOUGHER: 37.
asked the Minister of Labour whether his attention has been called to the fact that nearly 800 men of the Lady Lewis pits, South Wales, who refused to accept employment such as is customary in many other pits, have been granted unemployment benefit; and why it has been granted in these circumstances?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: These claims to benefit were referred on appeal to the Umpire, who decided in favour of the claimants. I am sending a copy of his decision to the hon. Member. As
the hon. Member is doubtless aware, the Umpire is the final authority in such cases.

Mr. LUNN: 38.
asked the Minister of Labour how many persons ordinarily employed in the mining industry in Yorkshire were unemployed at the end of the first week of June, 1925; and how many were unemployed in the same week in 1924?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: At 25th May, 1925, the latest date for which industrial statistics are available, there were 9,931 persons recorded at Employment Exchanges in Yorkshire as unemployed in the coal mining industry, as compared with 2,343 at 26th May, 1924.

Mr. MAXTON: Is this the most favoured county in the whole of the British coalfields, so far as unemployment is concerned?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I could not say if actually it is the most favoured, but it is one of the most favoured, in any case. I should have to get the exact figures to be able to say whether it is the most favoured, but, undoubtedly, it is in one of the most favoured positions.

Mr. LUNN: Is it not a fact that this number is increasing every day?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I think, broadly speaking, it is true to say that unemployment in the coalfields has been considerably on the increase, and is still so to-day.

Mr. J. HUDSON: Is the right hon. Gentleman making any special arrangements or efforts to get from the Ministry of Mines some new policy which will meet this situation?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am quite sure the House will agree with me it is not possible to give a reply to that in the form of an answer to a question. The whole question, as every mining Member, or anybody who has to do with mines, knows, is an extraordinarily difficult problem. It might come out in discussion, but it could not conceivably be condensed in the form of an answer.

Mr. MAXTON: The Prime Minister, I think, is due to say something. He has admitted that Capitalism is breaking up. Does the right hon. Gentleman not think
it is time? Is he not going to say something. We have had Debate after Debate on the Adjournment Motions on this subject, but we have had absolutely nothing from the Secretary for Mines, and matters are going from bad to worse, and this is the best county. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order! Order!"] May I press my point, Mr. Speaker? Surely I am in order? [HON. MEMBERS: "Order! Order!"]

Mr. KIRKWOOD: The Speaker will tell him if he is in order or not.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Gentleman is not entitled to debate the matter.

Mr. MAXTON: Mr. Speaker, I am putting a question to the Prime Minister.

Mr. SPEAKER: I think the hon. Member was making a statement.

Mr. MAXTON: No, Sir.

Mr. HARDIE: May I ask the Minister of Labour whether he can say that the condition of the coal trade in the particular part of Yorkshire mentioned is due to the higher efficiency in the coal getting, or to the higher quality of the coal?

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Is the Minister of Labour not aware that in Yorkshire at this moment there are many collieries paying from 10 to 20 per cent. dividends, while other collieries are going out of employment; and does he think that until all the mines are taken as one unit there is any possibility of matters becoming better?

Mr. LANSBURY: May I—[HON. MEMBERS: "Order, order!"] I want to ask a supplementary question.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Do not let hon. Members think they are going to browbeat us.

Mr. LANSBURY: I want to ask the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Labour whether he does not think that his Department ought to ask the Prime Minister to give this House the time now, at once, to discuss this question of unemployment; and is it not a fact that not only in the mining industry but right throughout the East End of London and South-East of London unemployment is increasing by leaps and bounds, and does he think, as Minister of Labour, that we ought to sit here day after day like dumb dogs doing nothing?

Mr. SPEAKER: That matter has been dealt with.

Mr. LANSBURY: Mr. Speaker, we have had no opportunity, no chance to deal with it.

Mr. SPEAKER: Will the hon. Gentleman listen to me? What hon. Members have to do is to ask for the Ministry of Labour Vote to be put down; they have the matter under their own control.

Mr. LANSBURY: May I ask this question, Sir? Whether we Members on this side can ask you to give us the Adjournment Motion? This is a matter of bread and butter to hundreds of thousands of people, and we do not feel we should sit here and kill time like this by doing nothing?

Mr. SPEAKER: I am sorry to say it is not by any means a new matter.

HON. MEMBERS: It is getting worse!

Mr. SPEAKER: That is a reason for asking for a day to discuss the matter in Committee of Supply.

Mr. MAXTON: On a point of Order. I put a question to the Prime Minister, who has eluded all questions on this subject, whether in Debate or anywhere else. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] This is not a matter for the Minister of Labour but for the Prime Minister, who refuses to answer. I think he ought to give an answer to the question.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Gentleman must hand in his question. I should like to see it.

Mr. HUDSON: May I—

Mr. SPEAKER: This is unfair to other questioners.

Mr. BUCHANAN: The matter is a most important one!

SHIPBUILDING AND ENGINEERING (CONFERENCES).

Sir W. SUGDEN: 36.
asked the Minister of Labour what results have obtained in respect to the conferences between employers and employés in respect to the shipbuilding industry and the engineering trades?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The conferences in the shipbuilding industry are still in progress. With regard to
engineering, I would refer my hon. Friend to the reply which was given on 11th June to the hon. Member for Lambeth, North (Mr. Briant). I can tell the hon. Gentleman the substance of that reply, if he wishes. The substance was, that a letter from the Engineering Employers' Federation of the 2nd June was, apparently, misunderstood by the unions, and that the further letter from the employers would be considered by the unions on the 19th June.

Mr. ERSKINE: Is there any chance of this Conference coming to an end at some future date?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I trust so, because I am quite certain that the more quickly both sides in this Conference will get down to the actual facts, the better it will be for everybody.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Does it not follow that the facts will be these—that Capitalism is breaking up?

BENEFIT (CONVICTIONS FOR FRAUD).

Sir F. HALL: 40.
asked the Minister of Labour how many persons were convicted of fraud in connection with the application for receipt of unemployment benefit during the years 1921, 1922, 1923, and 1924?
May I ask, Mr. Speaker, whether you are aware that words have been left out of the question which are the important part. I want to know whether these persons, by reason of their conviction, have become ineligible for any further unemployment pay?

Mr. SPEAKER: It has not been brought to my notice before.

Sir F. HALL: On a point of Order. That is the information I wanted, and that has been specially left out of the question. May I ask on whose authority?

Mr. SPEAKER: I was not aware of the point. Perhaps the hon. Member had better put another question down covering the query.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: The number of persons convicted, bound over or admonished on charges of knowingly making false representations for the purpose of obtaining unemployment benefit was 746 in 1921, 1,570 in 1922, 2,326 in 1923 and 1,779 in 1924.

Sir F. HALL: May I ask the right hon. Gentleman whether he can tell me whether these people who have been convicted of these offences are precluded from obtaining unemployment donations in future?

Mr. SPEAKER: I find that the reason why that part of the question was disallowed was because it was purely a legal question, and such questions are not allowed. They are matters for the Courts.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Can the right hon. Gentleman give us the percentages of these persons, apart from the total number?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I could give the figures of the percentages calculated out, if the hon. Gentleman will put down a question.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman tell us just roughly?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Perhaps the hon. Gentleman had better put a question down. I could not give him a rough calculation without it possibly being inaccurate so that he might afterwards complain of it, but, if need be, I can get the percentages with the least possible delay.

Mr. J. JONES: The master is not a joke.

Sir F. HALL: On a point of Order. May I say that I am not asking a legal question; I am only asking whether the Regulations laid down by Parliament to preclude those who have been convicted of receiving unemployment donation are being carried out; whether under the law as laid down they can or cannot continue to receive it? I venture to suggest that I am entitled to a reply to that question.

Mr. SPEAKER: The hon. Member must let me see that question.

Mr. J. JONES: Arising out of the previous answer, can the Minister of Labour tell us how many bankruptcies there have been in the same period?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: That is a question that should be addressed to the President of the Board of Trade.

Mr. PALING: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the figures that he
has given bear out the allegation made by the Chancellor of the Exchequer that there is growing up a habit of learning to qualify for the dole?

Sir JAMES REMNANT: Am I in order, Mr. Speaker, in asking a question as to which of these points have been legally decided, and in how many cases, and, further, since legal decisions have been given, whether further relief has been given to the people?

Mr. SPEAKER: I think that would be in order, but I would like to see the question in writing.

Mr. WALLHEAD: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that the figures that have been given by him justify the aspersions cast upon the working classes by the Chancellor of the Exchequer?

Mr. SPEAKER: I have already said that is a matter of opinion, and for debate.

POPLAR.

Mr. MARCH: 41.
asked the Minister of Labour the numbers of men, women, boys and girls living and registering on the Employment Exchanges in the Poplar district during the month of March, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925, respectively?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I am circulating in the OFFICIAL REPORT a table showing the numbers of men, women, boys and girls registered at the Poplar Employment Exchange at the end of March in each of the years mentioned. It may be assumed that practically all these persons were resident in the area of the Exchange, which includes the Limehouse area and portions of Hackney. Stratford and Canning Town.

Mr. MARCH: And Greenwich?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: I think not.

Mr. MARCH: Yes, I think so. Will the Minister consider the number of our people who are living on the Island who have to go to Greenwich or Deptford to sign on?

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Perhaps the hon. Member will put down a question of detail like that.

Mr. MARCH: I want those residing in the Poplar district, wherever they may be registered.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Will the hon. Member communicate with me, or put a question down on that additional point, which is rather one of detail?

Mr. J. JONES: Will the Minister consider the fact that in one of the biggest industrial centres in the East End of London, the Silvertown district, which I represent, the people have to go to Poplar to sign on, and they are all included in the Poplar area when it comes to a question of administration? I say it is a disgrace.

Following is the table:


Persons on Registers of Poplar Employment Exchange.


End of March.
Men.
Boys.
Women.
Girls.
Total


1922
8,214
339
1,620
252
10,425


1923
7,682
388
1,304
201
9,575


1924
7,864
310
996
205
9,381


1925
8,145
236
1,139
81
9,601

Oral Answers to Questions — ROYAL AIR FORCE.

CRANWELL AND SLEAFORD RAILWAY.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 42.
asked the Secretary of State for Air the losses on the railway between Cranwell and Sleaford for the years ending 31st March, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925; and what are the passenger fares per mile charged?

The SECRETARY of STATE for AIR (Sir Samuel Hoare): As the reply involves statements of figures, I will, with my hon. and gallant Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Colonel WOODCOCK: May I ask the Minister what the passenger fares are now, and why they do not bear some relation to the cost of working the line?

Sir S. HOARE: My hon. and gallant Friend, when he sees the answer, will find that I am giving him information on that point.

Following is the reply:

As regards the first part of the question the difference between expenditure and
receipts (including in the latter a credit for the conveyance of Government traffic) was approximately as follows:


For year ending 31st March:
£


1922
5,800


1923
4,000


1924
3,570


1925 (estimated)
4,600


Receipts cannot be expected to balance expenditure on a line of this nature, but any alternative means of transporting the large volume of Government stores at present carried by this railway—approximately 15,000 tons last year—would involve considerably greater expenditure.

As regards the second part of the question, the passenger fares are:



s.
d.


First class return
1
0


Second class return
0
9


Third class return
0
6

Full return fare is charged for single journeys. Monthly tickets are issued to Royal Air Force personnel residing out of the station and to civilians in Air Ministry employ at the following rates:



s.
d.


First class
18
8


Second class
14
0


Third class
9
4


Monthly tickets are also issued at the special reduced charge of 3s. 6d. a month to airmen on the married establishment for whom quarters are not provided.

ACCOUNTANT OFFICER (EMBEZZLEMENT).

Colonel WOODCOCK: 43.
asked the Secretary of State for Air what action was taken respecting the accountants' officer who embezzled £735 10s. 3d. between February and May, 1922, from the Royal Air Force; and has any disciplinary action been taken against the officer who was responsible for the gazettement of this accountant without verifying his official reference with the Admiralty, who, in February, 1922, notified the Air Ministry of his unsatisfactory conduct?

Sir S. HOARE: As regards the first part of the question, the accountant officer referred to was apprehended, convicted of embezzlement, and sentenced to three years' penal servitude. As regards the second part, this accountant officer had appeared before a selection board,
and had produced testimonials which appeared eminently satisfactory from officers under whom he had served. This was early in 1922, at a time when the new station accounting system had only just been introduced, and a considerable number of accountant officers was therefore urgently required. In order to avoid delay, the officer in question was gazetted before the usual inquiry had been addressed to the Admiralty to verify his previous service under that Department. The present practice is to verify previous service in all cases before gazettement, and a case of this kind should not occur again. I do not think that disciplinary action against any individual is called for in the circumstances.

CARNWELL FARM ACCOUNTS.

Colonel WOODCOCK: 44.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether he can give the results of the trading accounts of Cranwell farm for the periods ending 31st March, 1924, and 31st March, 1925; whether an officer of the Royal Air Force is still responsible for the farming operations; and, if so, what is his rank?

Sir S. HOARE: As regards the first part of the question, the farm was let to a tenant as from 3rd November, 1923, and the trading account for the farming operations carried on under Air Ministry direction ceased, therefore, from that date. The trading account from 1st April, 1923, to 2nd November, 1923, is shown in the Air Services Appropriation Account, 1923–24, pages 82–85. In view of the change of system in November, 1923, the other parts of my hon. and gallant Friend's question do not arise.

Colonel WOODCOCK: Can the right hon. Gentleman say how much per acre this farm is now let at?

Sir S. HOARE: If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will put down a question on that point I will give him the information.

CAIRO-BAGDAD PASSENGER SERVICE.

Brigadier-General WARNER: 52.
asked the Secretary of State for Air whether the Royal Air Force is engaging in the transport of passengers, on payment of fares, between Cairo and Bagdad; and, if not, when he will be able to organise a passenger service, either by the Royal Air Force or by Imperial Airways, between these two towns?

Sir S. HOARE: Since my hon. and gallant Friend's question was put down I have made a statement in regard to the Cairo-Bagdad air route, in my reply to the hon. and gallant Member for Hallam (Major-General Sir F. Sykes) on 11th June, and I think that statement will give him the information which he desires.

PARACHUTE FATAL TRIAL DESCENT.

Mr. VIANT: 56
asked the Secretary of State for Air (1) the precise object of the trial descent in the new parachute on 26th May last, when Corporal Wilson was killed; if Corporal Wilson was ordered to make a trial descent; and, if so, by whom;
(2) if the parachute used on 26th May last by Corporal Wilson was an Irving free-type; if he was told of the danger of pulling the rip-cord before the parachute was clear of the aeroplane; and if he was told that the pilot would open out his engine as he stepped off the ladder, so as to avoid fouling the parachute;
(3) if, for the parachute trial on 26th May last, the automatic arrangement was installed whereby the hand rip-cord could not become effective until after the automatic line had exerted its pull and the parachutist was clear of the machine?

Sir S. HOARE: I will answer the hon. Member's three questions together. As regards the first, Corporal Wilson was an aerial gunner, and the object of the descent was to practise him in a mode of escape which may at any time be necessary for life-saving. As stated in my reply on 15th June to the hon. Member for Peckham (Mr. Dalton), these trial descents are purely voluntary, and no pressure of any kind is brought to bear on any officer or airman to induce him to take part in them. As regards the second question, the answer to all three parts of the question is in the affirmative, except that the object of the opening out of the engine is to give the jumper a greater forward movement, rather than to prevent fouling the parachute. As regards the third question, the hon. Member would appear to be confusing the static type of parachute with the free type, which was used in this case. In the latter there is no automatic arrangement for pulling the rip-cord; its operation depends entirely on the pulling of
the rip-cord by the jumper himself after a period of at least a second has elapsed from the time of the jumping.

Oral Answers to Questions — DOMINIONS (COMMUNICATIONS AND CONSULTATIONS).

Colonel GRETTON: 47.
asked the Prime Minister whether, seeing that a Dominion branch in the Colonial Office charged with dealing with communications and questions affecting the self-governing Dominions was established during the Government of 1906–10, and that it was agreed at the time of the Imperial Conference of 1918 that communication and consultation of the Prime Ministers of the Dominions and of Great Britain should be direct with the Prime Minister of Great Britain, he will say if that arrangement has been discontinued; if so, why; and if the announcement made of the intended appointment of a Secretary of State for the Dominions in any way modifies or is in conflict with the desire of the Prime Ministers of the Empire expressed in 1918 for direct communication without the intermediary of a Secretary of State?

Colonel GRETTON: Before I put this question, may I say that it is not quite in the form in which I drafted it, but it is, in substance, the question that I desire to ask.

The PRIME MINISTER: The answer to both parts of the question is in the negative. The circumstances in which direct communications between Prime Ministers take place are clearly set out in the Resolution of the Imperial War Cabinet of 1918, printed on p. 165 of the Proceedings of the Imperial War Conference of that year (Cmd. 9177). This Resolution was confirmed at the Conference of 1921, and remains in force.

Colonel GRETTON: Has my right hon. Friend looked up the private records of the Imperial Conference, or the minutes of the Imperial Cabinet, in regard to the answers he has just given me?

The PRIME MINISTER: I have looked at the minutes, but I have not looked at the other.

Colonel GRETTON: May I ask my right hon. Friend if he will do so, and reconsider the matter?

Oral Answers to Questions — SAFEGUARDING OF INDUSTRIES.

INQUIRIES (CONDITIONS).

Captain BENN: 48.
asked the Prime Minister whether the Government still considers itself bound by the terms of the White Paper in granting inquiries and imposing duties in favour of industries which make application?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Sir Burton Chadwick): I have been asked to reply. There has been no change in the policy of the Government in regard to the safeguarding of industries.

Captain BENN: May I ask the Prime Minister if he will kindly answer the question? Is the policy of the Government as laid down by him in debate in this House, that the only avenue is through the procedure laid down in the White Paper?

The PRIME MINISTER: As far as I remember, that is so; but I have not myself investigated the matter with reference to this question, I asked the Board of Trade to look after it.

Captain BENN: May we take it that industries which cannot satisfy the conditions of the White Paper will be eligible for a duty?

The PRIME MINISTER: I do not know whether my hon. and gallant Friend means every condition in the White Paper. That question was raised on the Lace Duties. It is perfectly obvious that the ultimate decision rests with the Cabinet as to whether or not the recommendations made by the Committee shall be put in force.

Captain BENN: But if the Committee report that the conditions of the White Paper are not fulfilled, will the industry still, under the Government policy, be eligible?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should like to wait until the circumstances arise.

Sir R. THOMAS: May I ask the Prime Minister whether it is not the fact that almost every industry in the country is now making application?

The PRIME MINISTER: Not that I am aware of.

FOREIGN GOODS (SWEATED LABOUR).

Mr. DIXEY: 49.
asked the Prime Minister whether he is aware of the general dissatisfaction at the large amount of foreign goods received into this country from abroad which are manufactured under sweated conditions; and will he consider introducing legislation to prevent such articles being sold in this country?

Sir B. CHADWICK: I have been asked to reply. As my hon. Friend is aware, provision is already made for safeguarding particular British industries which are seriously affected by imports of goods manufactured under inferior conditions of employment of labour.

Mr. W. THORNE: Does not the hon. Member think that all goods made in this and all other countries are made under sweated conditions?

IRON AND STEEL TRADE.

Mr. HOPKINSON: 75.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether representatives of the iron and steel trade, or of any section thereof, have applied, or have signified their intention to apply, for safeguarding of their industry; and, if so, whether an inquiry will be granted?

Sir B. CHADWICK: As has been stated in reply to similar questions, the Government, following previous practice under the Safeguarding of Industries Act, will make a public announcement when an inquiry is granted in respect of any industry. For the reasons already given, I do not think it is desirable to make announcements in regard to applications which are or may be pending or under consideration.

Mr. HARRIS: Under the regulations will it be impossible to impose any duty, should favourable recommendations be made in these reports under the Finance Act, and, if so, will it be done once a year?

Sir B. CHADWICK: I do not find that point raised in the question.

Mr. HOPKINSON: As the reply makes it perfectly obvious that such an application has been made, will the Parliamentary Secretary advise the Government to have some consideration for the trades which will have inflicted upon them insufferable burdens by the granting of that application?

Lieut.-Colonel Sir JOSEPH NALL: Is there any legal disability which will prevent any body of traders applying to the Board of Trade, if they think it worth their while, and in the interests of their business?

Sir B. CHADWICK: Not that I know of.

Sir R. THOMAS: Does the hon. Gentleman not think it wise, in the interests of all concerned, that we should have a list of the firms which have applied for the safeguarding of their industry?

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise.

Oral Answers to Questions — SECRETARY FOR SCOTLAND.

Mr. BOOTHBY: 50.
asked the Prime Minister whether His Majesty's Government has reached a decision with regard to the status of the Secretary for Scotland?

The PRIME MINISTER: I would refer my hon. Friend to the answer which I gave on the 25th March in reply to a Question by my hon. Friend the Member for the Maryhill division of Glasgow (Mr. Couper).

Mr. BOOTHBY: In view of the very great interest which is taken in Scotland in this question, may I ask the Prime Minister whether he thinks he will be in a position to announce the decision of the Government before the end of the present Session?

The PRIME MINISTER: Oh, certainly; I have given an undertaking to that effect.

Mr. MAXTON: In considering this matter, will the right hon. Gentleman recognise that public opinion in Scotland will be fully satisfied with a rise in status without any rise in the emoluments?

The PRIME MINISTER: An explicit statement was made last time I answered this question.

Oral Answers to Questions — STIRLINGSHIRE JUSTICES (ADVISORY COMMITTEE).

Mr. JOHNSTON: 60.
asked the Attorney-General whether he can now give the names and addresses of the new Advisory Committee for the appointment of justices for Stirlingshire?

The SOLICITOR-GENERAL (Sir Thomas Inskip): I am unable, at present, to give the information asked for by the hon. Member. I understand that the Lord Chancellor has settled the composition of the new Advisory Committee, but that the invitations to serve on the Committee have not actually been issued to the proposed members. The Lord Chancellor proposes that the term of office of the Committee shall commence on 1st July next, and I have no doubt that he will be happy to give the hon. Member the names of the members of the Committee as soon as they have been appointed.

Oral Answers to Questions — PROPERTY (LOCAL RATES).

Mr. MARDY JONES: 61.
asked the Minister of Health the total rateable value of all rateable property in England and in Wales, separately, in 1923 or in the latest year for which the figures are available; and what was the total sum collected in local rates upon the said rateable property in each of the countries for the same period?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY of the MINISTRY of HEALTH (Sir Kingsley Wood): The assessable value for local rates of property in England and Wales (with Monmouth) at the beginning of the financial year 1923–24 was £224,217,740 and £12,246,956 respectively. The total sum collected in local rates during the financial year was approximately £133,046,000 in England and £8,841,000 in Wales (with Monmouth).

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: May I ask whether the figures are gross or net?

Oral Answers to Questions — HOUSING.

CONSTRUCTION.

Mr. MARDY JONES: 62.
asked the Minister of Health what is the total number of houses built under the Addison housing schemes, the total number built or in course of construction under The Housing Act, 1923, and under The Housing Act, 1924, up to the latest available date?

Sir K. WOOD: As the answer involves a tabular statement, I will, with the hon. Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The following is the statement:

The number of houses completed and under construction on the 1st May last under the various Housing Acts is as follows:—

—
Number of houses.


Completed.
Under construction.


Housing, Town Planning, Etc., Act, 1919.
172,571
1,342


Housing (Additional Powers) Act, 1919.
39,186
—


Housing, Etc., Act, 1923
76,809
43,032


Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924.
3,259
13,170


Totals
291,825
57,544

PROFITEERING.

Mr. W. BAKER: 64.
asked the Minister of Health whether he is aware that profiteering in houses is on the increase; whether his attention has been called to certain houses which have just been erected in Balham at the cost of £800 per house which are being offered for sale leasehold at £1,650; and whether, if he has not power to deal with this matter, he will seek authority from Parliament?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend has no evidence that profiteering in houses is on the increase. As regards the houses to which the hon. Member refers, my right hon. Friend understands that they were not subsidised from public funds, and he has no information with regard to the sale prices of unsubsidised houses. He does not think that it would be practicable to deal with this matter by legislation.

Mr. BAKER: Does not the hon. Gentleman think that it is the duty of the Government to safeguard the position, so far as their middle-class supporters are concerned, having regard to the fact that this is the second piece of information I have brought to his notice of gross profiteering? Does he not think that this matter ought to be inquired into?

Sir K. WOOD: The facts which the hon. Gentleman refers to in his question refer to houses with which neither the State nor the local authorities have anything to do. With regard to subsidised houses the local authorities can—and in many
cases they do so—make the condition that, on re-sale, after a certain period, a certain purchase price should not be exceeded.

Mr. BAKER: If the middle classes cannot look to this Government for support and succour will they not be forced to turn to the Labour party?

DIRECT LABOUR.

Mr. MARCH: 65.
asked the Minister of Health whether he will state the number of houses built under direct employment of labour, and the cost of same, out of the number completed under the 1923 and 1924 Housing Acts, respectively 76,809 and 3,259, and the comparable accommodation?

Sir K. WOOD: On the 1st instant, 82,699 houses had been completed under the Housing Act of 1923, and 4,461 under the Act of 1924. The numbers erected by direct labour included in these figures are 1,328 and 746, respectively. Of the 1,328 houses, 943 were non-parlour type, 299 parlour type, and in 86 cases the type is not known; of the 746 houses, 460 were non-parlour type, 86 parlour type, and in 200 cases the type is not known. Information as to the final costs of these houses is not available.

COLLIERY COMPANY SCHEMES.

Mr. MARDY JONES: 63.
asked the Minister of Health what is the total number of houses built or in course of construction in connection with housing schemes promoted by colliery companies throughout Great Britain for which financial assistance is being made out of public funds; what is the name of each colliery company promoting such housing schemes; the number of houses in each such housing scheme; and the name of the local housing authority in whose area each housing scheme is being carried out?

Sir K. WOOD: With the hon. Member's permission, I will circulate the answer in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The answer is as follows:

The following statement gives information for England and Wales in regard to schemes subsidised directly by my right hon. Friend's Department. My right hon. Friend regrets that he has no particulars as to colliery companies' houses which are subsidised under the schemes of local authorities for the assistance of private
enterprise. As regards Scotland, I would suggest that the hon. Member should

Name of Colliery Company.
No. of houses authorised up to 1st June, 1925.
Building Position on 1st June, 1925.
Name of Local Authority in whose area scheme is situated.


Houses under construction.
Houses completed


HOUSING, ETC., ACT, 1923.






Bolsover Colliery Housing Assn.
276
—
144
Southwell R.D.C.


Skegby R.D.C.


Chislet Colliery Company
…
300
20
—
Blean R.D.C.


INDUSTRIAL HOUSING ASSN.






Maltby Main
…
366
6
40
Rotherham R.D.C.


Rossington Main
…
502
30
472
Doncaster R.D.C.


Bullcroft Main
…
379
22
270
Doncaster R.D.C.


Yorkshire Main
…
293
29
198
Doncaster R.D.C.


Brodsworth Main (Highfield)
…
14
—
14
Adwick-le-Street U. D. C.


Brodsworth Main (Woodlands)
…
546
54
186


Llay Main
…
158
55
95
Wrexham R.D.C.


Markham Main
…
485
—
190
Doncaster R.D.C.


Firbeck (Firbeck)
…
54
—
54
Worksop R.D.C.


Firbeck (Llangold)
…
156
6
100


Cortonwood
…
204
83
99
Wath-in-Dearne U.D.C.


Hickleton Main
…
284
44
224
Thurnscoe D.D.C.


New Monckton
…
183
71
112
Hemsworth R.D.C.


Old Silkstone
…
197
89
105
Dodworth U.D.C.


Newstead (Newstead)
…
188
101
75
Basford R.D.C.


Newstead (Blidworth)
…
248
24
98
Skegby R.D.C.


Dalton Main
…
253
94
—
Rotherham R.D.C.


Upton
…
79
61
—
Hemsworth R.D.C.


Dinnington Main
…
185
50
—
Rotherham R.D.C.


Markham Steam Coal
…
101
22
79
Mynddislwyn U.D.C.


Oakdale Steam Navigation
…
131
—
101
Mynddislwyn U.D.C.


Sheepbridge Coal and Iron—






Llangwith
…
272
54
218
Chesterfield R.D.C.


Glapwell
…
144
8
136
Chesterfield R.D.C.


Staveley Coal and Iron—






Hollingwood
…
324
93
177
Chesterfield R.D.C.


Poolsbrook
…
182
85
97
Chesterfield R.D.C.


Duckmanton
…
285
79
3
Chesterfield R.D.C.


Tredegar Coal and Iron—






Abertysswg
…
42
30
—
Rhymney U.D.C.


Wyllie
…
36
—
—
Mynyddislwyn U.D.C.


Markham & Co., Ltd.
…
16
—
16
Chesterfield T.C.


HOUSING ACT OF 1924.






Shipley (Derby) Housing Assn.
…
200
—
—
Basford R.D.C.


Totals
…
7,083
1,210
3,303

Oral Answers to Questions — POOR LAW RELIEF, POPLAR.

Mr. MARCH: 66.
asked the Minister of Health if he will state the number of able-bodied men and women who were receiving relief from the board of guardians in the Poplar district during the month of March, 1922, 1923, 1924, and 1925, respectively?

Sir K. WOOD: As the reply includes a number of figures I will, with the hon.

address a similar question to my right hon. Friend the Secretary for Scotland.

Member's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

The reply is as follows:

No separate figure of the number of able-bodied men and women in receipt of relief is available. The figures below show for the months named the average number of persons returned as being ordinarily employed but in receipt of domiciliary relief, including the wives (or husbands) of such persons:

Month.
Men.
Women.


March, 1922
4,999
4,339


March, 1923
6,306
6,037


March, 1924
6,417
6,427


March, 1925
5,290
4,650

Oral Answers to Questions — CATTLE SLAUGHTERERS.

Mr. STEPHEN: 67.
asked the Minister of Health if the workmen employed in slaughtering cattle in the slaughter-houses in London, Manchester and Birkenhead are insured under the National Health Insurance Act; and whether they will be included under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Bill?

Sir K. WOOD: My right hon. Friend is not in possession of the information necessary for answering the question, but he is making inquiries and will inform the hon. Member of the result in due course.

Mr. STEPHEN: 76.
asked the Secretary for Scotland if he is aware that the workmen employed in slaughtering cattle in the Glasgow Corporation slaughter-house are not insured under the National Health Insurance Act; whether he will state the reasons why they are not included; and if it is proposed to include them under the Widows', Orphans' and Old Age Contributory Pensions Bill?

The SECRETARY for SCOTLAND (Sir John Gilmour): The reply to the first part of the question is in the affirmative In reply to the second part, as the men do not work under a contract of service between employer and employed, they are not eligible for insurance within the meaning of the Health Insurance Acts. In reply to the third part, as they are not insurable for health purposes they do not come within the scope of the Pensions scheme. Such of them, however, as may have already been insured under the National Health Insurance Acts in respect of any insurable employment for a period of two years and have paid 104 qualifying contributions will have the opportunity under certain conditions of electing to become voluntary contributors.

Mr. STEPHEN: Will the right hon. Gentleman not endeavour to make arrangements that workmen such as those referred to in my question will be in-
cluded under the new scheme of social insurance?

Mr. BUCHANAN: Is it not a fact that in Birkenhead and Liverpool this class of workmen is included under the National Health Insurance Act; and will he consider the advisability of having these men in Glasgow placed under the same Act? Why is it that there is a different treatment for the workmen in Liverpool and Glasgow?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I am not aware of the case to which my hon. Friend refers, but I will consider it.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider the whole position, which was placed before his predecessor some years ago?

Sir J. GILMOUR: I cannot say more than that I will investigate the whole subject.

Oral Answers to Questions — POST OFFICE.

BROADCAST ADDRESSES.

Mr. VARLEY: 69.
asked the Postmaster-General whether, in view of the fact that the British Broadcasting Company has given assurances that its wireless talks would not be used for the broadcasting of political propaganda, any representations have been made to the company with regard to the wireless talk broadcast by the company from London on the night of 8th June, in which an attack was made on the Government of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics?

The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Viscount Wolmer): I am assured that the British Broadcasting Company do their best to exclude from broadcasting addresses anything in the nature of political propaganda; and, judging by the rarity of complaints, their efforts are generally successful. The address in question, if considered in its entirety, does not appear to me to transgress the limits of what may properly be broadcasted.

Mr. VARLEY: May I take it that the Government will prevent, as far as possible, propaganda being broadcasted, or alternately make provision for the broadcasting of all points of view?

Viscount WOLMER: Yes, Sir.

Mr. J. JONES: I will make a speech one night which will paralyse them.

SUBTERRANEAN WIRELESS.

Viscount SANDON: 70.
asked the Postmaster-General if his attention has been called to the successful experiments in the United States on subterranean wireless; whether any such experiments are officially being undertaken in this country; and, if so, with what success?

Viscount WOLMER: Experiments in wireless transmission, using buried cables instead of an aerial, have been conducted by the Post Office from time to time, but the results do not suggest that such a system of transmission would be suitable for commercial purposes.

Oral Answers to Questions — KEW GARDENS (REFRESHMENT ACCOMMODATION).

Sir R. HAMILTON: 71.
asked the Minister of Agriculture whether he will consider installing for the public convenience a second tea and refreshment place in Kew Gardens, in addition to and nearer to the Kew entrance than the existing tea place?

Major BARNSTON (Comptroller of the Household): The First Commissioner will give this matter his consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

ROYAL FIELD ARTILLERY.

Viscount SANDON: 72.
asked the Secretary of State for War if, in view of the retention of the abbreviations R.H.A. for certain units and personnel, a similar privilege can be granted to the Royal Field Artillery, who have an equal sentimental attachment to the old nomenclature?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Captain Douglas King): The title "R. H. A." is of far greater antiquity than the title "R. F. A.", which was only adopted when the separation of the branches of the regiment took place in 1899. It has been decided to re-amalgamate the branches, and the Royal Field and Royal Garrison Artillery now revert to the original and far older designation "R. A."

CASTLE GREEN, BROUGHTY FERRY.

Mr. JOHNSTON: 74.
asked the Financial Secretary to the War Office whether ho has received a resolution from the Town Council of Dundee asking the Government to allow the provision of a footpath for the public convenience through the Castle Green at Broughty Ferry; whether he is aware that the town council's negotiations for repurchase of the Castle Green from the Government have fallen through; and if he is prepared to receive representations on the necessity of restoring the old public privileges of transit?

Captain KING: I have not received a copy of the resolution referred to, but I have been informed that a resolution regarding the provision of a footpath through the Castle Green was passed at a meeting of the ratepayers. I am aware that as the Green at Broughty Ferry is required for military purposes, it is not possible to entertain the town council's application to purchase it. As regards the last part of the question, I shall be prepared to consider any representations which the town council may wish to make.

Oral Answers to Questions — TERRITORIAL TROOPS (ILLNESS AT CAMP).

Lieut.-Colonel POWNALL: 73.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether he has any information as to the state of the men of the 91st Territorial Brigade, Royal Field Artillery, who were taken ill while attending a week-end camp; and if he can state what was the cause of their illness?

Captain KING: All the men in question had recovered sufficiently to permit of their discharge from hospital on the morning after their admission. Investigation which is being made into the cause of their illness is not yet completed; I will communicate the result to the hon. and gallant Member in due course.

Oral Answers to Questions — WAR PENSIONS (STABILISATION).

Mr. J. BECKETT: 77.
asked the Minister of Pensions whether he can yet give any assurance that War pensions will not be reduced before 1st January, 1928?

The MINISTER of PENSIONS (Major Tryon): I am in entire agreement with the reply given by the late Labour Government to a similar question, that a decision cannot advisedly be anticipated on a matter which has to be determined in relation to conditions that may obtain in the future. But it is the intention of the present Government, in the interests of pensioners, to consider at the earliest practicable moment an equitable measure of stabilisation for a longer period than that suggested by the hon. Member, not only of flat-rate War pensions, but of all other allowances under the Pension Warrants. The decision on this matter, obviously, cannot be reached without the fullest consideration of all the conditions involved.

Mr. BECKETT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that the Prime Minister has recently given a guarantee to this effect, and is it desirable that guarantees should be given to electors at by-elections that may not be given to this House?

Sir W. SUGDEN: Is it not a fact that if pensions are stabilised, in view of a possible higher cost of living, it may mean hardship to ex-service men?

Major TRYON: I am not aware of any rule which debars a Government, when a statement is made that it is the intention of the Government to cut down pensions next April, from saying that that statement is absolutely untrue—as it was. It seems to me very hard indeed on the sick and wounded and the widows that this anxiety should be unnecessarily created. My hon. Friend the Member for the Hartlepools (Sir W. Sugden), in his supplementary question, raises a point of great importance. The first stabilisation, which was for 3½ years, told at one moment against the pensioner, because the cost of living went up. The second stabilisation, which was also for three years, made by Mr. Bonar Law's Government on assuming office, told throughout in favour of the pensioner, because the cost of living was comparatively low. It is vital that the Government should consider the cost of living very carefully before coming to a decision as to the number of years for which it is desirable to stabilise.

Mr. BECKETT: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that in this House
questions have been continually put on this point, and no answer could be given until a by-election arose?

Major TRYON: It is quite true that this question was repeatedly put to the late Government, and they refused to answer it. [Interruption.]

Mr. STEPHEN: Does the Minister of Pensions give us the assurance that under this scheme of stabilisation there will be at least no reduction in these pensions?

Major TRYON: The position is as I have stated, that we intend to give the pensioner security for a longer period than that suggested from the benches opposite.

Mr. STEPHEN: Can the Minister not give us a definite answer as to whether there may be reductions or not under this scheme of stabilisation?

HON. MEMBERS: Answer!

Mr. SPEAKER: The point is hypothetical; there is no scheme before the House.

Oral Answers to Questions — EX-PRISON OFFICER FARDON.

Mr. HAYES: 78.
asked the Secretary of State for the Home Department whether ex-prison officer Fardon, who was dismissed from the prison service, has applied for a Petition of Right to sue for damages for wrongful dismissal; and, if so, with what result?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Guinness): A Petition of Right was submitted, but, in view of the Attorney-General's opinion, no fiat could be granted.

Oral Answers to Questions — NATIONAL DEBT SERVICES.

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: 80.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he will give a comparative statement in English currency of the annual charges for national debt services in Germany, France, Italy, Belgium, and Great Britain; and what percentage these figures constitute of the Budget for each country?

Mr. GUINNESS: The figures are being prepared, and I will circulate a tabular statement in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the statement:


—
Expenditure.
Debt Charge.
Per Cent.


United Kingdom (1925–6)
£799,400,000
£355,000,000
44.4


France* (1925)
…
Fcs. 32,690,000,000
Fcs. 15,350,000,000
47.0


Italy (1924–5)
…
Lire 20,861,000,000
Lire 7,131,000,000
34.2


Belgium (1925)
…
Fcs. 6,470,000,000
Fcs. 1,829,000,000
28.3


Germany (1925–6)
…
Reichsmarks 6,743,000,000
Reichsmarks
Debt—
18.2


132,000,000


Reparations—


1,095,000,000


* Budget as passed by the Senate on the 30th May, 1925. Amending proposals have since been introduced.


The figures for foreign countries are given in their own currencies. The value in sterling depends on the choice of the rate of exchange.


The figures include Debt Redemption in those cases where it is provided for in the ordinary Budget.


It should be added that inferences should only be drawn from these figures with great caution, and subject to many qualifications.

Oral Answers to Questions — NEW DUTIES (ADVANCE IMPORTS).

Mr. H. WILLIAMS: 81.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the large increase in importation of musical instruments, silk and silk manufactures, clocks and watches, and cinematograph films during May, as compared with April, he proposes to make the import duties on these articles retrospective?

Mr. REMER: 82.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if he has noted the heavy importation of manufactured silk since he opened his Budget on 29th April; and if he will take action to make his Budget proposals retrospective, at any rate to 1st June?

Mr. GUINNESS: As stated in the reply which I gave on the 15th June to a question by the hon. and gallant Member for Gainsborough (Sir A. Henniker-Hughan) about the importation of motor cars, the Chancellor of the Exchequer is carefully considering the questions raised by the increases in the rates of importation.

Mr. REMER: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that these imports are increasing, and may I ask whether the Chancellor of the Exchequer will take into consideration the fact that in the case of silk the raw material comes from a long distance, namely, from China, while the manufactured goods come from a much nearer country, namely, France, and will he take into consideration the
possibility of postponing the duty on the raw material in order to give equality to the British manufacturer?

Sir R. THOMAS: Does not the fact that these imports are continually increasing prove that these things are cheaper, and is not that better for the country?

Mr. WILLIAMS: Arising out of the original answer, has consideration been given to the remarkable figures disclosed in the May trade Returns?

Captain BENN: If it be the intention to make the duties retrospective, will the right hon. Gentleman say exactly what Parliamentary procedure he proposes to follow?

Mr. GUINNESS: I think it will be time enough to discuss that when the question actually arises.

Captain BENN: Will the right hon. Gentleman proceed while the Finance Bill is in Committee, or does he propose to do it on Report?

Mr. GUINNESS: I cannot answer a hypothetical question.

Mr. SPEAKER: It would need a Resolution in Committee of Ways and Means.

Oral Answers to Questions — PRESS CABLE RATE, AUSTRALIA.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: 85.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether, in view of the fact that the Pacific Cable Board, the Australian Government, and the Post
Office, subject to Treasury consent, have agreed to a reduction in the existing Press cable rate to Australia of 1½d. per word, he will state what is the attitude of the Treasury in this matter?

Mr. GUINNESS: The Press rate has been twice reduced since 1909, and is now 7½d. a word against 2s. 6d. a word for ordinary cables. A proposal for further reduction is now under consideration, but I cannot yet say what the decision will be.

Sir H. BRITTAIN: In view of the very great importance of facilitating Empire Press communications, will the right hon. Gentleman, seeing that there is this unanimous agreement, try to come to a decision as soon as possible?

Mr. GUINNESS: As my hon. Friend is no doubt aware, there is great congestion on this particular cable at the moment. The proportion of the Press rate compared with the general rate is lower than it used to be, and it is a matter for grave consideration whether, until the cable facilities are increased, as they shortly will be, and wireless facilities are provided, we should be justified in making any change, but we are considering the matter.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: May I put a question to the Prime Minister regarding business, on a point of which I have given him private notice, namely, whether, in view of the desirability of placing the fullest possible information before Parliament and the country regarding the situation in China, it will be possible to arrange, say to-morrow, for a part of the sitting to be devoted to that subject; and, if so, wall the Prime Minister then tall us what business he proposes to take from the list that he announced yesterday?

The PRIME MINISTER: I should be perfectly willing to fall in with what the Leader of the Opposition desires. I think it would be a good thing to have a short discussion, and be able to make a statement on a question that is agitating a good many minds at the present moment. I fear that the Foreign Secretary will not be back, but, of course, I should in that case make the statement myself. I think
we can easily arrange it, say, at a quarter past eight and, if it be necessary, discuss it, say, till eleven o'clock. As to the details, perhaps they might be arranged through the usual channels.
With regard to business, I hope that both sections of the Opposition will be willing to allow us to suspend the Eleven o'Clock Rule, for the purpose of taking at any rate most of the business which we had intended to take, that is to say, the Second Reading of the Tithe Bill and the Report and Third Reading of three small and, I believe, non-contentious Bills—two Merchant Shipping Bills and the Roads Improvement Bill. I have cut out, from what I mentioned provisionally yesterday, the Public Health (Scotland) Bill, and I do not suggest taking any other Orders on the Paper.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am very glad that the Prime Minister is affording an opportunity to the House to discuss the situation in China, and for a statement to be made. I wanted to ask another question. I should like to know when the arrangement which has been entered into between the Foreign Secretary and the French Foreign Secretary will be circulated to the Members of this House? I understand from the Press that it has appeared officially in Germany and France, but I have not yet heard whether any arrangement has been made for communication to Members of this House of the terms of the so-called Pact, or, rather, the arrangement made between the two countries.

The PRIME MINISTER: I am very sorry I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman that information, but I will get it for him without delay. It is my desire at the earliest possible moment that such information should be circulated, but I am afraid I have been rather busy, and have not looked, in the last three or four hours, at that point.

Mr. J. JONES: Surely those of us who sometimes read the "Times," to get to know what the other people did, have a right to ask why it is that the Government of this country cannot do the same as the Governments of other countries, who have published officially to the people what has happened. We have had no declaration yet, and the Prime Minister says himself he does not know what is going on.

Mr. MacDONALD: Would it be possible to circulate any Papers on China?

The PRIME MINISTER: That I do not know.

Mr. BATEY: The Prime Minister has intimated that he wants to suspend the Eleven o'Clock Rule to-morrow. Would it not be possible to forego that claim? I have given notice, on the Adjournment to-morrow night, to raise the subject of the speech delivered by the Home Secretary last Saturday. He said the Socialists and Communists were trying to prevent peace between the coalowners and the miners. Just now there are delicate negotiations going on between the coal-owners and miners. It was a wicked statement for the Home Secretary to make.

Mr. SPEAKER: Perhaps I can help the hon. Member. If the House be willing to dispose of the business which has been named by 11 o'clock, the hon. Member will still have his chance. Should that not be the case, I will endeavour to find the earliest opportunity for the hon. Member.

Mr. BATEY: This matter is so important that if the Prime Minister intends to go on with the suspension of the Eleven o'Clock Rule to-morrow I would ask him will he to-morrow afternoon give us a chance of moving the Adjournment of the House on the matter?

Mr. SPEAKER: The Prime Minister cannot do that. I have said that if tomorrow night be not available, I will endeavour to find a further opportunity.

DISTRICT AUDITORS.

Mr. LANSBURY: I beg to move,
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the law with respect to the powers of District Auditors to disallow and surcharge parts of items upon the audits of the accounts of receipts and expenditure of a local authority.
This is a short Bill, but it contains a matter of very vital importance to every municipal and other local authority throughout the country. Until about a year ago it was understood by local authorities that wages paid and contracts made were matters for their own discretion, and matters over which auditors and the Ministry of Health had no control
whatever. Only on one occasion that I can remember has a similar question to the one this Bill proposes to deal with ever been raised, and that was on the occasion when the Auditor of the then Local Government Board surcharged the Westminster Council because it accepted a tender for a contract at a figure rather above the lowest. The Courts then decided that the council had the right to choose whatever contractor they cared to. The Auditor on that occasion did not think it worth while to appeal against the decision of the lower court. Later on the same Auditor, investigating the accounts of the Poplar Borough Council, found that they had fixed a minimum rate of wages and surcharged on the basis that the Council had no right to pay over the Trade Union rate or the rate fixed by the Joint Industrial Council plus certain allowances which, in the Auditor's discretion, he considered wise The Council cook the case to one Court and lost. They took it to the first Appeal Court and won. Then the Auditor took it to the House of Lords, which upheld the decision of the Auditor. The decision of the House of Lords, however much may be said for it from the legal point of view, from the point of view of practice is absolutely impracticable. Up to the present this House has never laid down that local authorities must pay the Trade Union rate. They have never laid down that local authorities must pay the Joint Industrial Council rate. I can quite understand that, if this House decided, it might say to every Local Authority, "Here is a minimum or a maximum rate of pay that you may pay your mployés," but the Auditor says that he has the power to decide what is a fair rate of wages and what a Council or a Board of Guardians may pay.
It seems to me that if that decision holds, no board of guardians and no town borough or urban district council will know from one year to the other what wages they may pay, because already this is what has happened. The first surcharge, so far as the board of guardians is concerned, took place on 30th September, 1922, and I beg any hon. Members, who are giving me any attention at all—they may, of course, think it of no importance whether the rights of local authorities are maintained or not—but I will challenge any one of them to go down to any town council in the dis-
trict he represents and defend the principle that I am seeking to repeal. To show the absurdity and the contradictory position in which we find ourselves in the East End of London. the board of guardians' auditor, responsible to the Ministry of Health, told us in 1922 that he must surcharge the £4 minimum, and he put the basis of his surcharge down. He takes the 1914 rate of £1 13s.—he puts the rise in the cost of living at 71 per cent.—£1 3s. 6d.—then he allows the guardians a discretion of 15s., making a basic rate of pay of £3 11s. 6d. The auditor admits that the guardians have some discretion, but he fixes it at the arbitrary sum of 15s. That is what the board of guardians' auditor has done. The borough council auditor has done this. In the first year he took the pre-War wages plus the average cost of living—not a fixed rate but the average—and then he allowed the council in the same district £1 a week as their discretion. The auditor for the guardians fixes the discretion at 15s. The auditor for the borough council in the same district fixes it at 20s. That is not all. The same auditor for the borough council the next year drops altogether the arbitrary figure and fixed an arbitrary percentage of 20 as the amount allowable to the discretion of the council.
I want to ask any sane persons in this House who can get their minds clear of any prejudice about Poplar how two local authorities in the same district can know what rate of wages they will be allowed to pay. Next year or the year after a new auditor may come along, and, although the Council or the guardians are paying on the basis that the previous auditor said was fair, say that he considers that a lower percentage ought to be paid. The Bill is a one Clause Bill, and it simply provides that the auditor shall not have the power which the House of Lords has said he has. In conclusion, I want to say that, if a Council like that of Westminster may have the right to accept a tender at whatever price it chooses and be responsible only to its electors, then a borough in the East End of London ought to have the same legal right to pay the wages which they consider fair. The effect of this, and I beg that Members will realise it is to say to a working-class district: You shall have the
power to elect your council and your guardians, but you shall not have the power to fix wages and conditions, and, if this power be allowed to remain, then it is perfectly certain that there will be a great revolt by the workers both against trusting to political and administrative action.

Mr. GERALD HURST: I rise to oppose the Bill. I do ask the House to think well before giving a First Reading to a Bill of this character. I have no doubt whatever that the motives and intentions of the Bill are beyond all criticism, but I believe, and I am sure, if they would only give their serious consideration to the question, that hon. Members opposite will also believe that the Bill really is based upon a fallacy. The powers of the auditors which this Bill seeks to subvert are powers which have been in the possession of district auditors since 1875.

Mr. J. JONES: On a point of Order. I would like to ask the hon. and learned Member if he will give us chapter and verse for that statement as to the power of borough auditors.

Mr. HURST: Certainly. It is under the Public Health Act, 1875, that these auditors have the powers of which the hon. Member complains.

Mr. JONES: On a point of Order again. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] I have a right to rise to a point of Order if I cannot speak. Will the hon. and learned Member tell us what are the limitations upon an auditor? He can summon the members before him, but he cannot charge them.

Mr. SPEAKER: That is not a point of Order.

Mr. HURST: The powers of which the hon. Member complains are powers exercisable only in two circumstances. The power to disallow expenditure is a power which the auditor has only where the expenditure is contrary to the law. The power of surcharge which the auditor has under the Act of 1875 is only to surcharge the person making illegal payments.

Mr. JONES: Is the payment of wages illegal?

Mr. HURST: If this Bill be sanctioned by Parliament, it means that you will deprive the ratepayers who pay the rates to these various local authorities of one
of their best safeguards against the squandering of their rates on illegal expenditure. If the auditor be deprived of these powers it means that if a local authority chooses to spend the funds at its disposal on any sort of extravagance—on banquets, on bonfires, and on sending missions to Moscow or on any other extravagance—there will be no safeguard. The object of the safeguard is to prevent illegality, to prevent extravagance for which there is no warrant, and it is quite obvious that that safeguard is based on sound principle. We have a similar safeguard here in Parliament. No Cabinet can spend money on items of expenditure which have not had the specific approval of the House of Commons.

Mr. JONES: What about Supplementary Estimates?

Mr. HURST: In the same way, unless local authorities can show that their items of expenditure are legal, the auditor will not pass them. It is the worst type of Private Bill legislation to bring in a Measure like this appealing to vague sentiment with regard to the salaries paid by the Poplar guardians and using that vague sentiment as an instrument for

the removal of one of the most useful protections and safeguards so far as the ratepayers are concerned. If we remove this check against illegality, it means that we are placing the ratepayers of a poor borough at the mercy of a local authority. No one can suggest that the squandering of rates is going to help any borough, even in the East End of London. One of the reasons those boroughs are so distressed and miserable at the present time is the high rates. No fresh industries will be set up in a district where rates are already so ridiculously high. I do therefore ask the House to maintain what has proved to be a useful safeguard To the ratepayers of this country for the last 50 years and not to be led away by vague and loose sentiment to give their sanction to a Measure which is based purely on sentiment and which is against all sound traditions of local self government.

Question put
That leave be given to bring in a Bill to amend the Law with respect to the powers of District Auditors to disallow and surcharge parts of items upon the audit of the accounts of receipts and expenditure of a local authority.

The House divided: Ayes, 113; Noes, 215.

Division No. 164.]
AYES.
[4.8 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Adamson, W. M. (Staft., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Ammon, Charles George
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hayday, Arthur
Ritson, J.


Baker, Walter
Hayes, John Henry
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Barnes, A.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Rose, Frank H.


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Batey, Joseph
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Scurr, John


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sexton, James


Buchanan, G.
Jenkins, W. (Glamorgan, Neath)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sitch, Charles H.


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smillie, Robert


Clowes, S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Compton, Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snell, Harry


Connolly, M.
Kelly, W. T
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Davies, Evan (Ebbw Vale)
Kennedy, T.
Stamford, T. W.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Kirkwood, D.
Stephen, Campbell


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Sutton, J. E.


Dennison, R.
Lowth, T.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lunn, William
Thurtle, E.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Tinker, John Joseph


Gillett, George M.
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Gosling, Harry
MacLaren, Andrew
Varley, Frank B.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maxton, James
Viant, S. P.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Greenall, T.
Montague, Frederick
Warne, G. H.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Webb, Rt. hon. Sidney


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Oliver, George Harold
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Groves, T.
Palin, John Henry
Welsh, J. C.


Grundy, T. W.
Paling, W.
Westwood, J.


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Whiteley, W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Mr. Lansbury and Mr. March.


Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Windsor, Walter



Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)
Wright, W.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Fielden, E. B.
Murchison, C. K.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fisher, Rt. Hon. Herbert A. L.
Neville, R. J.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Fleming, D. P.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Balniel, Lord
Ford, P. J.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)


Barclay-Harvey, C. M.
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Nield, Rt. Hen. Sir Herbert


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Ganzoni, Sir John
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Gee, Captain R.
Owen, Major G.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Penny, Frederick George


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Bennett, A. J.
Goff, Sir Park
Pielou, D. P.


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Pitcher, G.


Berry, Sir George
Greenwood, Rt. Hn. Sir H. (W'th's'w, E)
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Betterton, Henry B.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Power, Sir John Cecil


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Radford, E. A.


Blundell, F. N.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Ramsden, E.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hammersley, S. S.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Harrison, G. J. C.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Haslam, Henry C.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Brass, Captain W.
Hawke, John Anthony
Remer, J. R.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Remnant, Sir James


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Briscoe, Richard George
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Henniker-Hughan, Vice-Adm. Sir A.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brooke, Brigadier-General C. R. I.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Sandon, Lord


Burman, J. B.
Hilton, Cecil
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Burton, Colonel H. W.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Shepperson, E. W.


Campbell, E. T.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Holland, Sir Arthur
Skelton, A. N.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Sir Evelyn (Aston)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Chapman, Sir S.
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Christie, J. A.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Clarry, Reginald George
Huntingfield, Lord
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Clayton, G. C.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Jackson, Sir H. (Wandsworth, Cen'l)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Cooper, A. Duff
James, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. Cuthbert
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Cope, Major William
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Thomas, Sir Robert John (Anglesey)


Couper, J. B.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Tinne, J. A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Crook, C. W.
Kinloch-Cooke, Sir Clement
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gansbro)
Locker-Lampson, Com. O. (Handsw'th)
Waddington, R.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Locler, J. de V.
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lougher, L.
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Lowe, Sir Francis William
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Watts, Dr. T.


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lumley, L. R.
Wells, S. R.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Dixey, A. C.
Macintyre, Ian
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Drewe, C.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Duckworth, John
Malone, Major P. B.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Eden, Captain Anthony
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wolmer, Viscount


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Margesson, Captain D.
Womersley, W. J.


Elliott, Captain Walter E.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W.R., Ripon)


Ellis, R. G.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


England, Colonel A.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Moles, Thomas
Young, E. Hilton (Norwich)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Everard, W. Lindsay
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Mr. Gerald Hurst and Lieut.-Colonel


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Sir Joseph Nail.

BILLS REPORTED.

Bradford Corporation Bill,

Reported, with Amendments, from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Bedwellty Urban District Council Bill,

Reported, with Amendments [Title amended], from the Local Legislation Committee (Section B); Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Orders of the Day — FINANCE BILL.

Again considered in Committee.

[Captain FITZROY in the Chair.]

NEW CLAUSE.℄(Estate Duty payable in respect of agricultural property to be charged in part or agricultural value at rate under Finance Act, 1919.)

(1) Where an estate in respect of which Estate Duty is payable on the death of a person dying after the commencement of this Act comprises or consists of agricultural property, the Estate Duty payable in respect of the agricultural property shall, instead of being charged on the principal value thereof at the appropriate rate payable under this Act, be charged as follows, that is to say, the duty 6hall be charged on the agricultural value of the property at the appropriate rate payable under the scale of rates set out in the Third Schedule to the finance Act, 1919, and shall be charged on the amount by which the principal value of the agricultural property exceeds the agricultural value thereof (in this Act referred to as "the excess principal value") at the appropriate rate payable under the scale set out in the Fourth Schedule to this Act.

(2) For the purposes of this Section the agricultural value of agricultural property shall be taken to be the value which the property would bear if it were subject to a perpetual covenant prohibiting its use otherwise than as agricultural property, decreased by the value of any timber, trees, wood, or underwood growing thereon.

(3) Where any agricultural property is subject to a mortgage, debt, or in cumbrance in respect of which an allowance is by law to be made for the purposes of Estate Duty, the mortgage, debt, or in cumbrance shall, for the purposes of this Section, be apportioned between the agricultural value of the property and the excess principal value of the property in proportion to the amounts of those two values respectively.

(4) In this section the expression "agricultural property" means agricultural property within the meaning of paragraph (g) of Sub-section (1) of Section twenty-two of the Finance Act, 1894, and the expression "appropriate rate" means the rate of Estate Duty appropriate to the principal value of the estate passing on the death of the deceased.℄[Mr. Guinness.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Guinness): I beg to move "That the Clause be read a Second time."
This Clause fulfils the undertaking given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the early hours of yesterday morning. The Clause gives no advantage whatever to agricultural estates over and above the position which they enjoy at the present time. It merely provides that the purely agricultural value of agricultural property which passes at death will be charged, as now, under the 1919 scale which is found applicable, according to the size of the estate, to the whole of the property. The remainder of the value—

Mr. WESTWOOD: A ruling was given by the Chairman of Ways and Means the other day, to the effect that no one could move a Clause, to come in at the end, unless it was the individual whose name was down to the Clause. The name in this case is the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is not being moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: That Rule does not apply to Members of the Government.

Mr. MARCH: Why should there be any distinction between Members of the Government and Members of the Opposition, more particularly Members on the back benches? How are we going to keep in order if that is going to be allowed?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I do not want to occupy the time of the Committee with an explanation.

Mr. MARCH: Surely there cannot be a procedure for one and not for others.

Mr. GUINNESS: Over and above the purely agricultural value, the remainder of the value, for instance, the prospective building value, will be chargeable at the increased rate, which is again arrived at not by treating the value of the real estate as a separate estate, but aggregating it with all the other property passing at death. The Clause needs very little explanation. The only point which may conceivably not be clear to those who have not come in contact with the rather complicated law as regards landed property, is the provision in Sub-section (2) that in arriving at the agricultural value, the timber, trees, wood, or underwood growing thereon shall be excluded. The reason for that is that timber is already left out from the principal value, until that timber is sold, or until the whole estate is sold.
when the amount due for the sale of timber has to be paid to discharge the deferred obligations of the Death Duties. From the standpoint of justice to individuals, I think there are many grounds for this new Clause. There is nothing new in distinguishing between the case of landed property and other property. Indeed, our code of taxation is full of special treatment as between one class of property and another. The right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) recognised that when he brought in various exemptions for different kinds of landed property. It is not only a question of landed property. Our code of taxation is full of allowances for special cases and special individuals. That has been added to very considerably in this Budget by allowances in the Income Tax, and so forth. I know that the question of justice to individual claims may not appeal to hon. Members opposite, so much as the economic effects which may be expected from intensifying the tendencies which have recently been shown under the existing scale of Death Duties towards the break up of agricultural estates. For the most part, land in this country is farmed by tenants who supply the working capital, while the landlord℄

Mr. MacLAREN: What does the landlord supply?

Mr. GUINNESS: I said that the tenant provided the working capital, while the landlord℄I had not finished my sentence.

Mr. MacLAREN: What does he supply?

Mr. GUINNESS: He provides the fixed capital.

Mr. HARDIE: What is the fixed capital?

Mr. GUINNESS: The fixed capital is the land, the—

Mr. HARDIE: Does he make the land?

Mr. GUINNESS: It is his interest in the estate. The buildings, the land and the owner's value in the estate. It is necessary under the existing scale of Death Duties for many estates to be realised, and it is becoming more and more difficult to do so in the open market, owing to the decreasing net yield from agricultural property, and the decreasing advantage of that class of investment from the point of view of
income. This is compelling the tenants to buy their own holdings, and to make their insufficient capital suffice not only as working capital but also for the fixed capital which was previously supplied by the landlord. In this respect, landed enterprise in agriculture is in a very different position from enterprise, say, in a joint stock company, where there is no corresponding division of interest between working capital and fixed capital, and where the sales of title of a certain portion of the property do not deplete the working capital which is needed for the enterprise.
Nothing that we are doing in this Finance Bill can stop the process of breaking up agricultural estates, but we can avoid accelerating it. This Clause is, I think, fully justified, because it will give time to the agricultural industry to adapt itself gradually to these new conditions and not be subject to still further sudden drains on that capital which is so urgently needed.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: The right hon. Gentleman has stated succinctly and quite clearly the purport of the Clause. He referred to the fact that I had been responsible on many occasions for exceptions in respect of certain classes of property. That is true. There are some of these exceptions for which I am responsible, and I am very glad of it. For instance, there are exceptions in respect of old pictures and works of art, which we were very anxious should not be sold, and that every inducement should be given to the owners not to part with them, as at that time our American friends were buying most of our best pictures. Therefore, as Chancellor of the Exchequer, I proposed exceptions from any object of that kind. But this is a different class of thing, and the right hon. Gentleman must really know that. It is really, in substance, an exception for a class. Here is an exception which is going to cost the Exchequer £500,000. In the first place, someone has to find that £500,000, if it is not to be found by the owners of agricultural land. I take it the Chancellor of the Exchequer needed that £500,000, otherwise he would not have included it in his original provisions. Therefore, someone has to find that money.

Mr. WALLHEAD: Silk stockings.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That has been cut down already, so there is no additional revenue from that. Therefore, there will be £500,000 to be found. What is the ground upon which the Government have proposed this exception for a particular class? Taxation is very high. The principle is a very dangerous one, for the very reason that the taxation in this country is very high. The people have borne it with very great patience. They have responded to the calls of the country in an exemplary manner. That is very largely due to the fact that, on the whole, every class of the community has been called upon to make its sacrifice, as was the case during the War. During the War the people responded to the call for sacrifices of all kinds because there was a general feeling that everybody without distinction had the same demand made upon him according to his ability and power. But the moment the Government begin to introduce provisions of this kind which create a privileged class and say that every class of the community must nay this particular tax except one, that is the beginning of discontent with the taxation of this country and it may be the breakdown of it. It is a very serious innovation which has been introduced and it was not worth while.
I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer what case he has for it in equity? As one who has had to deal with political forces I realise that the Chancellor of the Exchequer had his political difficulties, and I am not putting that, I assure him, as a super, but I may put first of all this question to him. From the point of view of equity and fair play what ground is there for imposing this additional taxation on every class of the community and saying that this particular class shall be exempt? That is what it comes to. I will give a few illustrations of how unfair it is. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said the other night that when a man dies leaving stocks and shares the executors can sell them, that there is a ready market for them, and that they do not experience the same difficulty as the owner of agricultural land in finding the ready cash to meet the demands of the Exchequer for Death Duties. That is not quite so. I put to him the other Day the case of the tradesman, the factory owner or the industrial employer who has not converted his business into a limited liability
company, or the industrial employer who may have converted his business into a limited liability company, for the shares of which there is no market℄and there are a great many cases of that kind.
Let us take the first. Take the case of a tradesman who has a shop, and who dies leaving property worth from £30,000 to £40,000. The executors have to pay an extra sum now in respect of Death Duties. Where can they find it? A man of that kind, as a rule, borrows money in advance of his savings in order to develop his business, and it may be assumed that there is a liability on that to the bank at the time of his death. What are the executors to sell? They cannot sell the shop, which is the necessary means of livelihood of whoever will carry on the business. They have to go to the bank, where probably there is already an overdraft, to borrow money not merely to pay the old Death Duties but the increased Death Duties imposed by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, which is a very difficult thing to do, certainly in these times of depression. It is said, "But look at the position of the landowner." But he has no difficulties of that kind. He has a marketable commodity, which he can dispose of, the sale of which does not interfere with his business. No doubt it narrows or contracts his estate, but it is not an interference with the big business which he is conducting, while in the first case it is.
In addition there is no difficulty in his borrowing money. If he is already mortgaged up to the hilt there will not be very much Death Duty to pay. You may assume that a landowner with large Death Duties to pay must have considerable assets upon which you are levying Death Duties. In the first case the executor is embarrassed to find the additional Death Duties; in the second case the trustees or the executors have no difficulty at all in placing their hands on quickly convertible cash, because there is a ready market for agricultural land in the country. Let me put another case. Suppose a trader has saved money. Take an ordinary country town with tradesmen in it, some doing well and some not. The men who save money generally choose between two classes of investments. Some of them proceed to buy land. If they buy land, if they put their money into land, they do not increase the
employment of the community by one man. Suppose, on the other hand, they say "we will put our money into the development of our trade or business," here at any rate they are developing local industries, and they are promoting employment. It is in the interests of the particular community that capital should be used in that way, and it is especially the case in these little rural towns. If a man puts his money into land he is not doing any particular good to anybody. [HON. MEMBERS: "Why not?"] What I mean is that there is no particular good to the community in transferring the ownership from one person to another.
I am not in the least attacking the development of land, quite the reverse. If he were to put his money into the development of the land then he would promote employment, but if he puts his money into land simply as an investment, by the mere purchase of the land he does not create employment for anybody except for the lawyer. [Laughter.] On the other hand, if he puts his money into some local industries there undoubtedly he is promoting employment. But see what happens by this Clause. In the first place he is let off 5 per cent. in his Death Duties. In the second case, the executor would have to pay 5 per cent. more. Is that fair? It is really a premium upon the purchase of land. The Chancellor of the Exchequer says, "You put your money into enterprise for the benefit of the community. I will teach you! I will fine you £4,000 or £5,000 for doing that!" He visits the sins of the father upon the children by making them pay an extra Death Duty, because the father has invested his money in a way that is of some use to the community. That is not fair. It is unjustifiable, and there is no justification in the particular difficulty, which the Chancellor of the Exchequer mentioned the other day, of the landlord placing his hand upon cash.
Let us go beyond that and take some of the depressed industries of this country. Take the case of collieries, of iron and steel furnaces, of the tinplate trade, or of the shipbuilding yards. What happens there? Even if such a business is converted into a limited liability company, and the executor has to sell the shares, who will buy them now? How is he going to realise? You may say that his Death
Duties will not be high. They will, because although for the moment trade is depressed, there is an asset which will be valued by the Treasury for the purpose of Death Duties and, possibly, a very considerable asset. Therefore, the Death Duties would be high. Here are men who have to go to the banks for the purpose of obtaining cash to carry on their business. The banks are loaded up to the brim with overdrafts of this kind, and it there is a death the executor has to go to the bank again to raise money to pay to the Exchequer, and he will have to pay the extra 4 or 5 per cent. That is indefensible, if you are going to let off the land-owning classes of this country.
I put this to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that it creates a very special sense of injustice in those cases, which is bound to be very disastrous to the revenue. I ask him is there any special reason for the privilege which is given to this class which he is denying to other classes of the community. The farmer gets nothing under this. You may say that there are not many farmers who have £12,500. There are just as many farmers who are worth £12,500 as there are landlords. There are not very many such landlords in this country. The number, I should say, of the land-owning classes who own over £12,500 would be only a very few thousand. There is quite the same number of farmers who own that amount. When the farmer dies the executor has to pay not merely the old Death Duties but the new Death Duties upon his stock. What justice is there in that to the farmer whose enterprise is vital to the development of the farm? Everyone who has made any examination of the position with regard to farming knows that one of the difficulties with respect to agriculture is that it is under-capitalised. The landowner has the land. There it is. It will remain, whatever happens to the landlord. But if you begin to impoverish the man with the working capital, then you are doing an injustice and an injury to the community. You are making him pay this one, two, three, four or five per cent. extra.

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Churchill): Are you taking the case of a tenant farmer who does not own his land?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Yes.

Mr. CHURCHILL: If his stock is worth sufficient to enable his estate to be charged with the increased rates of Death Duty at something like 5 per cent., his stock will be worth £20,000 if it is worth anything.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: There is no use in the right hon. Gentleman going off on a small point of that kind. He himself takes it at £12,500. At £12,500 he begins to increase.

Mr. CHURCHILL: One per cent.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: That is right. If it is over that it gets to 2 per cent. I am quite prepared to take it at 1 or 2 per cent.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The right hon. Gentleman said 5 per cent.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I am taking the whole of them in general. There are farmers who have the necessary amount. They are very exceptional, I agree, but there are a few farmers who have considerable capital. There is a farmer whom I know who has 40,000 acres. If he stocked that farm in anything like the way in which it ought to be stocked he certainly ought to have £200,000. He does own the land, he is a tenant farmer who has taken the land. [HON. MEMBERS: "Who is he?"] I will give hon. Gentlemen, who are asking me, the name later on if they wish. I know two of them, one with 30,000 acres and the other with 440,000 acres. But I am willing to take the increase at from 1 to 2 per cent. Here is a man who has farming stock, and in cases of that kind who come within the figure, especially if they have saved money, they will have to pay upon their stock the addition of 1 or 2 per cent. and the landlord gets off. I ask the right hon. Gentleman how he justifies t7ie discrimination which he has made against the farmer in that case? Upon what ground does he do it? The case that he made was that the landowners are rendering more special services to the community than any other class, and that, therefore, they are entitled to special privileges.
I wonder whether the right hon. Gentleman has taken the trouble to read some of the comments made by a Member
of the Government of which he is such a prominent figure, with regard to the part played by the landowners in recent years? If I were to make this criticism, hon. Members opposite would say, "Here you are attacking the landlords again." Therefore, I shall not use any words of my own, because no words of mine could possibly be equal in severity and sternness to those used by a Member of the present Government. I refer to Lord Bledisloe, who is one of the greatest authorities on agriculture in this country. I first made his acquaintance as Secretary of the Landowners' Association when he came to ask for a remission in respect of repairs upon agricultural buildings. He, therefore, cannot be suspect. He is a landowner, and there is no man who has made a closer study of agriculture in this country and abroad. What does he say?
The prime condition under which farm tenancy can prosper is the owner's knowledge and management of his estate, similar to that exercised by the manager of an industrial company or business.
He also says:
The landowner has neither the knowledge nor the inclination to give his tenants the lead which they required.
That statement was made in an address to the British Association only two years ago. Another of his statements is:
Whereas at the end of the eighteenth and the beginning of the nineteenth century certain progressive English landowners were definitely and admittedly the leaders of the industry, to-day, and for the past 60 years, landowners have ceased to lead: Coke of Norfolk and his contemporaries in introducing developments which benefited the whole industry also benefited themselves and their whole environment, because these improvements were introduced on sound business lines. Land to-day in the hands of British landowners is more than ever an amenity, and although there are many whose serious impoverishment operates as an inducement to put their estates upon a business footing they are sadly conscious that they have not the knowledge to do so.
That is a statement by one of the Ministers of the present Government. I will take next a very distinguished agricultural expert, I suppose the most distinguished agricultural expert in this country, who is now in the employ of the Government—Sir Daniel Hall. He says:
Landowning in England has ceased to be a business; yet it is only by personal knowledge and hard work that owners can become leaders of their tenants and develop the capacities of their estates.
He goes on to speak of landowners playing for safety, compensating themselves for low returns by social position and amenities of landowning, and occasionally making a lucky stroke in selling profitably the land "which always has a monopoly value." Those are opinions expressed by two men who are above suspicion, as far as sympathy with the landowning class is concerned. I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer upon what ground does he single out a class which answers a description of that kind, given by men who are in complete sympathy with their order? By what equity, by what principle of fair play does he choose them for special privilege and exemption, and say that men who are risking their capital in such enterprises as collieries or factories or shipbuilding or farming are not to receive any sort of exemption, but that this landowning class which, according to these gentlemen, is suffering from an amiable incompetence, is to receive benefits running from one to five per cent.? It is utterly unjustifiable in equity and in fair play and upon any principle of fair taxation. The right hon. Gentleman is giving an exemption of £500,000 to the landowners of the country. That will not save even that class, and it will certainly not save agriculture. What he is doing will not even postpone the crash, the inevitable crash, of the present system. What is largely responsible for the high Death Duty paid by agricultural land? It is its monopoly value. I have just been reading a report of the Surveyors' Institute upon that subject. The report points out that landowners are assessed upon the basis of what the land will fetch in the market, on the assumption that each farm is sold separately. But that is the value.

Sir PHILIP PILDITCH: When was that principle introduced? Was it not in 1910?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: Then I am responsible, and I am very glad of it, because it is perfectly fair. I will tell my hon. Friend why. If they were to sell, as they do sell, in order to meet Death Duties, they get their full monopoly value in the market. [HON. MEMBERS: "A forced sale!"] It is not a forced sale in the least; it is no more a forced sale than the forced sale by executors who hold stocks and shares. It is exactly the same
thing. There is a market where they can cash their value. It is a monopoly value, which has no reference to the industrial value of land. It is a value which is largely, though not entirely, created by the landowners themselves. What do I mean by that? They naturally want to keep their estates together, and they do not put land into the market if they can avoid it. I agree with hon. Gentlemen opposite that they do it only when they are forced to do it. But that keeps up the value of land. Let any man who has lived in a village, as I have done, go and ask for an acre of land for the purpose of building a house there. He will not get it. I know cases where one has to pay, in a village with a population of 1,200, no less than £600 for an acre of land. Why? Because every landowner in that parish and in the two adjoining parishes refused to sell a single yard of land for the purpose of building a house, and this site was the only one which was available, and it was necessary to pay an extravagant monopoly value.

Sir GERALD HOHLER: Was that agricultural land?

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: It was used as agricultural land. At that time it happened to be a very small holding. It was the only agricultural land which you could get anywhere. That creates a monopoly value. The landlord complains that he is being taxed upon a basis which he himself has helped to create. If he insists upon a monopoly value he must pay his taxes upon the basis of a monopoly value. That is not unfair in the least. That is the whole difficulty with regard to agriculture. Take a farm of 200 acres. Suppose you let it at £1 an acre. If it is sold, owing to the monopoly value of land the farmer has to pay, in respect of the freehold, something which is more than the commercial value of that land. In, some districts he will have to pay 25 years' purchase, in some districts 20 years' purchase, and in others something between the two. He will probably have to pay for that farm the equivalent of £5,000 in some districts, and £4,500 in others. What does that mean? At 5 per cent. he would have to pay £250. In addition to that the whole cost of repairs will fall upon him, and he would be in a very good position if he got off with something which is the equivalent of £300 a
year. What is that? It is not the commercial value of the farm; it is not the value of the land for the man who cultivates it. He is paying for a monopoly value, a fictitious value, and the landlord who is in a position to receive that amount complains that the Exchequer is taxing him upon something which he himself has assisted to create.
The fact of the matter is that the landlord, in respect of taxation, is being strangled by his own privileges. The unfairness to the farmer is this. If he had a monopoly value for his produce in the markets, of course he could pay a monopoly price for his farm; but there is free competition in his markets and no free competition in the land. The result is that whenever you have sales of this kind the farmer is put in a very disastrous position. I am going to use an argument which at first sight the right hon. Gentleman will probably say is a defence of his position. I would point out that this does not go anywhere near the root of the difficulty. Take an estate, a fairly large estate, where the rents before the War were £10,000 a year. I will assume that the rents have gone up 15 per cent., which roughly represents the present position. If they have not gone up by 15 per cent. my case is all the stronger. Let us see how it works out. I am assuming that before the War, between costs of management and repairs, the rent would be brought down to £8,000. It makes no difference whether the land was 5,000 acres let at £2 an acre or 10,000 acres let at £1 per acre. I am putting the costs of management and repairs fairly low. The landowners' associations put them higher. I assume that the net rent before the War would be £8,000. Income Tax and Super-tax before the War would have been £591. There would have been an expendable income of £7,410. Let me at once say that the figures given by the various landowners' associations make larger deductions on both accounts, but I am putting the case moderately.
5.0 P.M.
Take the present case. The rent has gone up to £11,500. I am assuming an addition of 15 per cent. The Income Tax is 4s. I am assuming a Super-tax which is equal to what would be deducted, and I make a larger deduction for repairs.
Why? As any landlord knows, the cost of repairs is now nearly twice as much as it was. [HON. MEMBERS: "More."] That makes my case all the stronger, but I have worked out my figures on the basis that the cost has more or less doubled. That brings the net amount down to £7,650. The Income Tax and Super-tax would be £2,484, leaving an expendable income of £5,165, which means that the landlord has £5,000 as against £7,400 which he had before the War, even assuming the increase in the rent. But his Death Duties have gone up by 7 or 8 per cent., and I am not counting the additions put on by the right hon. Gentleman.

Mr. CHURCHILL: It would be a £200,000 estate.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I should put it at £220,000. When you come to the Death Duties this is the difference. Before the War the heir had to pay £26,400 on the basis of 22 years' purchase; he would now have to pay £48,000. I am taking it on the assumption that no alteration has been made at all. That is the basis upon which I am arguing. What does that mean? Does anyone imagine that under these conditions it is possible for the present system to continue? That is the point which I want to put to the Committee. Lord Bledisloe, in the course of the same paper, said that you could not keep landed estates together, apart from external aid, for more than two generations under the present system. I agree with the case put forward by hon. Gentlemen opposite to that extent, but I want to point out that it is idle to make concessions of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 per cent. It does not get anywhere near the root of the matter. You are merely creating a sense of inequity and inequality, a sense of unfair treatment, a feeling that you are putting one rate of charge upon one class of property and another upon another class of property, and you are doing it without achieving any purpose at all.
The Government ought to face the problem on much broader and bigger lines. Undoubtedly the position is very serious. I am making no charge against landlords in the least. I could give the case of the best landlord I know, who has about the best buildings in the county where he lives, and whose rents are about
the fairest, and no men could have done their duty better towards their tenantry and the community than he and his father before him did. But since the War and since all these heavy charges were made he has been unable to do what he was doing before. Drains are clogged up and cannot be put right because of the cost of material and labour, other work of the same kind cannot be done, but a tenant of this landlord said: "I do not blame the landlord in the least. He is the best landlord in the county, but this is the system." And the Government, instead of giving small concessions, ought to face the real problem. The Minister of Agriculture went down to Wales the other day and made a speech which was very serious. The right hon. Gentleman had been seeing the country there, and he was in a part of the country which has been famous for excellent farming—the Vale of Glamorgan, a very fertile and productive country. I think it was somewhere down there, but if not it does not matter. The right hon. Gentleman, in any case, said:
In Wales, including Monmouthshire, of a total area of 5,000,000 acres no less than 3,700,000 acres consists of grass land of which a large quantity is in poor condition, not merely because it is of indifferent quality but because a considerable amount of inherently good land has been let down by neglect.
No man who knows the countryside can fail to realise that things are worse than they were before. The land is deteriorating, buildings are getting into disrepair, there is dilapidation where previously some sort of effort was made to cope with it, and the rates are constantly going up. What does it mean? The landlord is the source of supply for that particular part of the capital. The partnership—and I am expressing no opinion one way or the other about it, but the partnership did exist on the good estates—is bankrupt. The landlord cannot, in the face of these figures, continue to do what he was doing. These two per cents. and three per cents. are not things that matter. There are the rates, there is the Super-tax and the Income Tax—which no man will see down to half-a-crown for a long time, and even if it were down, the conditions would still be bad, and there is the increase in the cost of materials. No landlord can do it without surrendering his
position in the district and becoming an absentee landlord, and then practically handing the rent over for the purpose. The system has broken down. I am not making these remarks as an attack upon the landlord system, I am making them purely from the point of view of emphasising to the House of Commons that the conditions are so completely changed owing to the War and the burdens of the War, that the partnership in the future is quite impossible, and the Government will have to consider the whole problem on very different and much broader lines.
The country districts are falling into disrepair and deterioration. Men are becoming idle in many districts and there is less labour. There is bound to be because there is no one who can spend money. This is not an indictment against a class, but an acknowledgment of the facts which every landlord knows as well as myself and every land agent throughout the country. There they are, going on the strength of repairs done before the War, of buildings erected before the War, of drains laid down before the War, and year by year all that is vanishing. Where is the money to come from for this purpose? This one, two and three per cent. is pure mischief. It is merely giving a small concession which creates the impression in other sections of the community that there is inequity and inequality between one class and another, and you are really achieving nothing. As an hon. Friend of mine said the other day, it is forcing the landlord to the front of the battle on very bad ground—on the worst ground that he could possibly choose. It is a mistake from the point of view of the landowning classes themselves who have chosen this battleground; it would be better for them to say frankly, "The system has broken down. We cannot discharge the obligations which we did our best to discharge before the War. We are not in a position to do so." Therefore, I ask the right hon. Gentleman in regard to this part of his Budget to look at this matter, not from the point of view of conciliating one interest by making a concession here and winning the support of another interest by making a concession there, but rather from the point of view of being a trustee with other co-trustees on that bench for the interests of a very great nation and of a very great industry vital
to this nation at a time of deep emergency in its history.

Mr. WILLIAM GRAHAM: No one on these benches will disagree in the least with the condemnation of the existing system which has just been expressed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), although I need hardly say that on analysis our remedy would be found to differ very widely from his. But the problem before us this afternoon is a problem of taxation and we must address our minds to it with the object, firstly, of trying to ascertain what is the position of the landowners of this country at the present day, secondly, of trying to find out what is being done by the agricultural community—after all, they are an important part of this question—and thirdly, of asking ourselves whether the proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer is a sound device in taxation. I think on most of these grounds we will be able to see that the Chancellor's proposal is of a dangerous character at present. I read the speech made by the right, hon. Gentleman in the early hours of the morning a day ago, and I heard the short explanation which was given by the Financial Secretary this afternoon, and it is perfectly clear that the proposal which they now put forward touches only a very limited part of this problem. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said he was surprised at the very small part which these estates comprising agricultural land play in the aggregate of rather more than £60,000,000, which is the yield of the Death Duties in this country. I believe he put it at not more than one-eighteenth or one-twentieth of the total. He himself went on to point out that the total cost of this concession in the present year is only £225,000, and £500,000 in a full year, so that by no stretch of the imagination is this proposal going to do anything at all to stop the break-up of estates—which was part of the case put to the Committee—and if it is not going to do that and if it is not going to help agriculture in any way, then I think there is absolutely no case for it at all. Certainly there is no case in taxation.
As regards the landowners no one can seriously dispute that very great changes
are taking place. There is a sentiment attached to land. A great deal of land has been purchased by people who are well able to pay. The difficult circumstances attaching to a portion, at least, of the land in this country are not really traceable to high taxation, but to the manner in which that land has been bought for reasons widely different from those we have under consideration. Then again all kinds of concessions have been given to the landowning and agricultural community. There is to-day a differential rating system over a large part of the country so far as they are concerned, and they have had other concessions from time to time, all of which must be remembered when we are invited to make a concession which would place them on a different footing from all other people in the community who are liable to Death Duties. I think on that ground the Chancellor of the Exchequer fails in the case which he endeavoured to make out. But by far the more important issue in the matter which we are considering turns on the fact that in this country we do not really know, in taxation; what the agricultural community is doing, and I think I will be able to make that point abundantly plain. Much has been made of the break-up of estates and the withdrawal of capital at a critical time in agricultural history, and the effect of that upon the tenant farmer and the occupying owner. But at the centre of this whole issue is the question as to what is really being done in British agriculture.
Have we any accurate record of that at all? From the very institution of the Income Tax in this country, the cultivators of the land have been in an exceptional position. They have never been exposed generally to the duty that all other taxpayers have of making a return of their actual profit from year to year. They have had the benefit of a system of paying on one time or less or, at its highest point, two times their annual valuation, and that has been accepted from the cultivators of agricultural land as the basis on which they are to be assessed for Income Tax. Now, without going into the remoter history of this problem at all, it will hardly be disputed that, during the War years, at least, the agricultural community did remarkably well, yet at the highest point they were only taxed on two times the annual valuation. It is perfectly true that they have always
had the option of going on to ordinary Schedule D assessment, based on actual profit, but what impressed me during the time that we studied this question in the Royal Commission on the Income Tax, and during the years that we have discussed it since, is that not even in times when depression was widely argued did more than a very small fraction of the agricultural community avail themselves of the opportunity of going on to the basis of their actual profits, so that it is at least fair to assume they were doing better under the system of taxation on so many times the annual valuation.
The Royal Commission in 1920 made a unanimous recommendation that that system of applying Income Tax to the agricultural community should cease, and that they should be placed on the basis occupied by practically all other payers of Income Tax in this country, but from that day to this, notwithstanding a good deal of effort in this House and outside, no step has been taken, and so we arrive this afternoon at a discussion of the position of the owners and cultivators of land—because they are bound up in this problem together—without being able to say definitely what is the agricultural income of Great Britain that we could bring within the scope of Income Tax review. A perfectly obsolete argument was offered to that state of affairs in that farmers did not keep books. Some people even went so far as to say that they could not reasonably be expected to keep them, notwithstanding about 50 or 60 years of elementary education, and that they were entitled, largely because of the fluctuating character of their industry, to this special concession. Nobody in the whole of the investigations of the Royal Commission on the Income Tax, which was a very representative body, ever for one moment thought that that plea could be sustained, and it was regarded as plainly a national duty in this matter of the taxation of the agricultural community, and for very much wider reasons, that we should find out exactly how farming operations stood. Unfortunately, as I have said, we are not in that position this afternoon, and I fail to see how you can take any step in the alteration of the scale of Death Duties in Great Britain, affecting, admittedly, the agricultural community,
until you know exactly the position that the agricultural community occupies.
Moreover, I think it is perfectly fair to mention the historical advantage that that community has enjoyed. There is not the least doubt that this system of taxation has inured to the advantage of large sections of people engaged in agricultural operations, and I should imagine that, so far from abnormal times entitling them to any further concession, that is an argument that should be used against them. I do not dispute there is a certain agricultural depression at the present day—no one can deny that—but, after all, if we make an analysis of that agricultural depression, I am afraid that part of it might have been avoided by the agricultural community, because it is undeniable that many of them thought these war-time prices were going to last for a much longer period, and in other directions, sometimes not connected with their industry at all, they bit off financially very much more than they could chew. All these things are perfectly fair arguments this afternoon, and, in my judgment, they go right to the root of this concession which the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes. After all, he defended it as something in the interests, not merely of the land-owning class, but of agriculture as a whole.
The only other point I want to put is this, and I think it is one of some substance in this Debate. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has followed an unusual and, in some respects, rather an amusing course in these Budget discussions. Throughout, his whole effort seems to have been to set off one section of the community against another, and one of the methods of his balancing scheme was to say definitely, over and over again, in respect to the concession he is giving to Super-tax payers, which is so far also an advantage to the class we have now under review, that he proposed to make this change in the scale of Estate Duty, yielding after a full year, approximately, the same amount, and to apply it, as he put it, to practically the same class of people. Now, he himself, for no sufficient reason at all, departs from that principle and makes a concession of £500,000 in a full year to one particular class. I fail to see how he is going to justify that in later Debates; but, quite apart from that
altogether, this is an interference, for a very dangerous reason, with the scale of Estate Duties in this country. In effect, it comes to this, that he is going to give a differential rate of a rather lower amount to certain classes on the transfer of estates, and he does that because of an element of hardship which he thinks is involved, but anyone familiar with either the history of Death Duties or the present practice will agree that nine out of ten men who are called upon to pay Estate Duty at the present time, or the people representing them who pay it, could put up all kinds of hardships, and I am bound to say, as one who would not make any concession to them at all, but would, in fact, increase the scale of Death Duties, that some of them could put up a very much better case than the people who are putting up this case to-day.
Be that as it may, the real point for the Committee to consider is whether you are going to begin the principle of giving a differential rate in the scale of Death Duties in Great Britain, because of the apparent hardship to a class, even in a time of general industrial and agricultural depression. I do not think, on any analysis, you can embark upon a proposal of that kind with any safety at all, and, consequently, what the Chancellor of the Exchequer proposes may be the beginning of a substantial modification of the whole Death Duties scheme, because next year others will be able to come forward, with even stronger arguments, and assuming that they get an equally cordial reception, their cases will be difficult to refuse. On these grounds, I think this proposal absolutely fails, and, so far as we on this side of the House are concerned, we propose to resist it at every stage.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Central Edinburgh (Mr. W. Graham), who has just spoken, has, in a temperate manner, examined the proposal which is now before the Committee, and he has criticised it, as was to be expected, in accordance with the general view of these matters adopted by his friends and party. He has described it as a very dangerous departure in taxation, and as the prelude to a whole system of special remissions and advantages, given to one class or
another, over the whole area of the Death Duties. But even in the course of making these criticisms the right hon. Gentleman made, as he always does, several reasonable admissions. He admitted the force of the existing agricultural difficulty, and he pointed out that this class of property was under a considerable depression at the present time. His point, which he made in his concluding observations, was that I was departing from the exact balance which I had dwelt so strongly upon as between the remission of Super-tax and the addition to the Death Duties. Well, I suppose I must admit that the balance is deranged to the extent of one-twentieth part. It was not an absolutely mathematical balance before, because, in fact, in the present year, we are losing £2,000,000 on the remission to the Supertax payers over and above the receipts to be obtained from the increased Death Duties, and so the actual balance between the two sides of the account will not be achieved until next year. I do not think that this very small derangement alters substantially the broad justice of the treatment which the Budget gives to the problem, and I do not think that it seriously affects the arguments which I have used a good deal in that connection. Still, I must admit that, for what it is worth, it is a relevant point. Out of £10,000,000 addition to the Death Duties, £500,000 has been abandoned in respect of this particular kind of property. I must admit that, as far as it goes. I do not wish to deal with this upon a purely mathematical basis, but in a practical spirit and in one which deals with the broad issues at stake.
Now I come to the speech which was delivered by my right hon. Friend the Leader of the Liberal party in the House of Commons, the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). I am glad to see my right hon. Friend returning to his place, because, curiously enough, the very first speech I had the opportunity of making in this House, a quarter of a century ago, was delivered in reply to him. During the whole of that period I have only once had the opportunity of following him in debate, and on that occasion a pressing engagement led him to leave the Chamber, so that I did not have the opportunity of his presence. [An HON. MEMBER: "When?"] During the
War. Although I have not been often called upon to reply, or attempt to reply, to him, I have studied over a long period of time, with very great attention, his argumentative methods, and have often admired the enormous skill and persuasiveness with which he manages to plead or argue any cause in which he is concerned. I traced, during the course of his speech, many of the processes of argument which I had so often admired in former years. But I think my right hon. Friend, for once, was a little less successful than usual in combining two mutually contradictory sets of arguments. One part of his speech was devoted to condemning in the sternest terms this exceptional favour to one particular class of prosperous, fortunate individuals who were enjoying the amenities of the land, the monopoly value of the land, and who had all these advantages, financial and otherwise. The other part of his speech was devoted to showing how this paltry remission could not in the slightest degree touch the grave problems with which land is afflicted, or avert the doom which is swiftly approaching it through the agency of Death Duties and high taxation.
It takes great still to reconcile those two opposite sets of arguments. Moreover, the right hon. Gentleman is qualified to present each of these cases with such extreme colour and force, that when they are placed in juxtaposition, it makes the task of combining them in one argumentative case all the more serious. As regards what he said about exceptional treatment, it is the case that agriculture has always been treated on a different basis in many respects for taxation purposes. No one has ever pretended that no exception can ever be made in the treatment of a particular kind of property. It there were anyone who would be precluded from using such an argument, it would be my right hon. Friend himself. He, from the very beginning of his political career, has always treated the land on an entirely different footing from other kinds of property. Sometimes he has treated it in an unfavourable and invidious way, and suggested that it should bear exceptional and special burdens, and sometimes he has extended to it special benefits. But never, at any moment in his career, whether actuated by stern or by benevolent moods, has he advocated that and should be treated in
the same way as other property. We had the mood of the Land Value Duties, the Increment Duties, the Undeveloped Land Duties, all dealing with a particular class of property in a particular way. It was argued in those days that taxation should have no regard to the particular class of property at all, and should only have regard to the individual deriving advantage and benefit from the property. It was the task of my right hon. Friend to develop, with his great power, the argument that you should have regard to the special source and the special character of the property, and that taxation should have regard to that.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: My right hon. Friend has forgotten, of course, all his past experience, but he will not mind if I remind him of a little partnership of that kind, where we excepted agricultural land on that occasion.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I am dealing with the broad, general question. My right hon. Friend is perfectly free to pick and choose between different classes, but certainly it was with great surprise that I found him holding me up as if I were guilty of some high crime and misdemeanour, because, following his mood, I have also been prepared to deal with a particular class of property in an exceptional manner. But there are many other instances in which land has been treated in a special way under the taxation system of the country. I am not going to weary the Committee with a great number of details, but in the case of the original Estate Duties in the Finance Act of 1894, special treatment of agricultural property was given. The principle value was not to exceed 25 times the annual value, and so on. That was part of the original foundation of the tax. It is quite true my right hon. Friend abolished that in his Budget. But to say, as he did the other night, this was the first time in the case of the Estate Duties that any differentiation had been introduced, is to ignore the actual foundation of the Estate Duties as presented by Sir William Harcourt in 1894. Then, the right hon. Gentleman himself exempted timber by a very wise provision, which has been productive of much advantage to the gathering wealth of the country in afforestation. He exempted timber from the scope of the Death Duties until it was cut down.
Timber is a growing asset, but really it is not different in principle from the reserves of public companies. These aspects of taxation may be held to stand together to some extent where the capital is being increased, where the future is being provided against, but the right hon. Gentleman picked out this one particular item which deals with agricultural property without attempting at the time—and very naturally—to apply the same principle to the others. There he applied a thoroughly exceptional treatment to the problem. Then, he himself gave special relief, in the Finance Act of 1914, by the quick-succession relief to land and also to business. That was exceptional treatment. Again, farmers have long received preferential treatment in regard to Income Tax. They can choose, as everyone knows, between being assessed in respect of their profits under Schedule "D," or by reference to the rental value of the land they occupy, and, naturally, they exercise that option in every case to the disadvantage of the State, and choose what is most favourable to them. There is a purely exceptional treatment of a problem connected with agriculture. Then the right hon. Gentleman gave, in his Budget, a special exemption to the agricultural class by the Income Tax relief granted in respect of the cost of maintenance, repairs, insurance, and management of property, beyond the flat-rate allowances, and the principle which he introduced has been extended to all land and all houses at the present time.
I am only pointing out that the right hon. Gentleman has no ground at all for making a serious attack on me for having introduced a new principle, because I have made an exception in regard to the present increase of the Death Duties in the case of agricultural land as such. That ground has been covered, and no one has covered it more effectually, and in many cases more widely, than my right hon. Friend himself. Land is by no means the only subject of taxation which enjoys special treatment. There is no doubt whatever that the co-operative societies at the present time are not assessed for Income Tax on exactly the same basis as other classes of property. [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes, they are!"] It is quite true that the result of making
the change would not lead to any large increase of revenue, but it is not true to say they are not differently treated.

Mr. NEIL MACLEAN: Such a tax would cost more to impose than would be received, because of the number of claims for repayment.

Mr. CHURCHILL: If the hon. Gentleman is not opposed to their being placed on the same footing, I should be glad to know it. The conclusion which I have reached on that matter is that the financial advantage would be small, and the political disputation would be considerable. I do not think we ought to throw out challenges, because, after all, there is a very strong feeling amongst other enormous bodies of His Majesty's subjects who are engaged in retail trade, the shopkeepers, that co-operative societies are placed in a position of unfair advantage. But I do not take the view that this calls for action at the present time, because I am advised that the financial advantage to the Exchequer would be small, and I am afraid we should find that we should be in for a very hot political argument, and my desire is to obtain the necessary money with the minimum of friction.
I am only using this argument in order to show very clearly to the Committee that the theory that you never, in any circumstances, differentiate in your treatment between classes of property, is not one which finds any support in our practice, or in the principles or views of any Party in the House. The very Order Paper yesterday was covered with new Clauses proposing all sorts of exceptions in particular cases. The hon. and gallant Member for Caithness (Sir A. Sinclair) had an Amendment on the Paper—"Relief from increased Death Duties in certain cases"—proposing that there should be relief for particular classes of taxpayers from the increase in the duties which we are imposing. [An HON. MEMBER: "In order to preserve your balance!"] Never mind the reason. We have all got our reasons. If anyone wants to make exceptions, he always has a reason. The question I ask is whether any exception can be justified, or whether it is against sound finance and good fiscal principle to make any exceptions.
I say that, so far as the exceptional treatment argument is concerned, there
is, from the point of view of precedent, and from the point of view of public policy, absolutely no foundation for the charge. The Statute Book is filled with exceptions, and agricultural land has often, if not always, been treated by successive Chancellors of the Exchequer in certain respects on a different footing. It is very natural that it should be so, because, as I have pointed out, it is in an exceptionally difficult position in regard to the realisation of assets passing at death. The expense alone of realising those assets as compared with many other forms of property—British stocks and shares, for instance—is four or five times as great. That is only one thing, and the illustrations could be greatly extended.
I am not attempting to give any positive benefit in respect of agricultural land. All that the Government are doing is conferring upon them a non-addition to the burdens they bear, and I cannot feel that this entitled any critic of the Government to employ severe and harsh language. I must admit I was astonished at the picture which my right hon. Friend conjured up of the tenant farmer, who owned no land, but who had such valuable stock that he might have to pay as much as 5 per cent. extra under the new scale of duties. I am bound to say I never contemplated the existence of any very large class of farmers whose stock was worth £50,000 or £60,000, and never owned an acre of land. But it may be that a particular case exists.

Mr. LLOYD GEORGE: I certainly corrected that by saying 1 or 2 per cent.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Even if you put it at 1 or 2 per cent., that will be a tenant farmer who owns stock worth between £25,000 and £30,000. It seems to me that the case of such a man, not owning any land at all, makes him a member, at any rate, of a rather restricted class, and if I am unwittingly inflicting upon him any injustice all I can say is that that justice is very small in the case of Death Duties operating on that scale. It will only be 1 or 2 per cent.
The right hon. Gentleman opposite proceeded to quote the case of an estate of 10,000 acres producing a revenue of, let us say, £10,000 a year, and he traced the incidence of taxation before the War and after the War upon an estate of that kind.
I have not checked the figures given, but they seem to me to be reasonable. The conclusion the right hon. Gentleman drew from those figures was that they show that the weight of taxation has become so heavy, particularly in respect of the Death Duties, that the existing system of land tenure can not possibly continue—which is perfectly logical. He said so crushing and destructive is the taxation that falls through the Death Duties upon agricultural estates that the existing system cannot possibly endure; it is passing away and is condemned. What greater argument could there be in favour of not at this moment needlessly adding to the pressure which, according to the right hon. Gentleman, is already carrying destruction over a whole class of the community, and to the existing system? It may well be that the alteration we are making, as was said the other night, is a paltry remission, and that having regard to the general pressure of taxation it will have no effect in the general movement of events in any decisive manner. At any rate, even on the admission of the right hon. Gentleman, the whole of the landed and agricultural property in this country is being driven into liquidation by the pressure of taxation and the Death Duties, and that, I would suggest, is a ground, at any rate, for not adding to the burden. That ground has been much more strongly expressed than I should have dared to express it for making the exception at the present time.
Changes which are very considerable are undoubtedly taking place in our rural life. Hitherto the land-owning classes of this country have financed the farmer, and if, as the right hon. Gentleman says, they are being taxed out of existence, being crushed by the weight of taxation, if, I say, that is the case, then it is perfectly clear that the farming community will have to obtain their capital in the future in some other way. Whether they will obtain it so cheaply as they have hitherto got it from the land-owning class has yet to be proved. No other method is in sight at the present moment. Would it not, however, even on the hypothesis of the right hon. Gentleman, be most imprudent on our part to accelerate the process of the extinction of the existing system, while at the same time we are not prepared with any
alternative method of financing the great operation of farming the land of the country? No! The right hon. Gentleman does, I think, fully justify in his argument the exemption of agricultural land from the present increase of Death Duties. He has fully shown by the precedents of his long public career that the exceptional treatment of land and other property in certain cases is fully justified. Under these circumstances I shall ask the Committee to support the Government in making the remission, which is in no sense a favour to a particular class, which avoids adding new difficulties to the conditions of rural life, already of a character which plainly gives cause for the most grave concern and anxiety to the nation at large.

Mr. RILEY: It has been stated that there is no intention of conferring any particular benefit upon agriculture other than that which is being given to-day. It may be true that the proposal will not confer additional benefit, but it is quite true that it will continue the special benefit which agriculture has enjoyed for some time now. Obviously, however, when the matter is carefully looked at it will be seen that under this proposal agricultural land is going to receive additional benefits as compared with other forms of property. Something might possibly have been said in favour of the comparatively smaller benefit which the relief from additional Death Duties will give agricultural land if this policy were a continuation of the policy persistently applied to agriculture. My right hon. Friend the Member for Central Edinburgh (Mr. Graham) mentioned that in the matter of Income Tax assessment agricultural property has enjoyed special privileges for many years. What are the facts with regard to the special assessment of agricultural property in the matter of rates? Since 1896 onwards the owners and occupiers of agricultural property have been receiving a special benefit of not less than £6,000,000 per year! Local rates were first reduced one half, that amounted to about £6,000,000 a year; then in 1923 there was a further reduction from a half to a quarter, and to-day agricultural property in that respect only bears a quarter of the rateable liability compared to other forms of property. I think I am quite within the
mark in saying that from 1896 down to the present day there has been a relief to agricultural property of no less than £100,000,000. It is proposed to extend that principle by a further concession now.
Two arguments have been put forward this afternoon as an excuse. One was that there is nothing new in this policy and that a differentiation has often been made. We on these benches object to that differentiation. It is a bad system. Agricultural property should be treated equitably like other forms of property The argument put foward by the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, which was that unless you are going to allow concessions of this kind to agricultural property agricultural estates will be broken up, that the monopoly would not be maintained if taxation was to be applied equally all round. Some of us are of the opinion that that would be of great benefit to the country; very much more than happens to-day. Owing to the present system, monopoly has got the grip it has at the present day. The argument put forward by the Financial Secretary seems to me to be one that should be opposed, and I hope the House will refuse to continue to re-enact this iniquity between agricultural property and other forms.

6.0 P.M.

Mr. KIDD: There was a striking difference between the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Central Edinburgh (Mr. Graham) and the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). The speech of the one was temperate and consistent while the speech of the other was inconsistent and intemperate. Hon. Gentlemen opposite above the Gangway take exception to the private system of land-owning, as they take exception to private property of any other kind. Generally, therefore, no Member on this side will resent the attitude of the Labour Members because they are consistent in this matter. Whatever the rights or the wrongs of nationalisation, as in the present case, theirs is a perfectly consistent attitude, and a perfectly natural one for the Labour party to take up. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs, however, was much less consistent and more difficult to follow. He discovered that the present
system was going all to pieces. Does he suggest nationalisation? If he does not, does he think it better to break up the large estates? He will correct me if I misrepresent his arguments, but they seem to me to amount to this: that at least in the land system in earlier times there were excellencies which we do not find in the industrial system, for in the old days certainly the laird and the landlord did their duty by the tenants and towards the public service. That is a fact. The system, however, he says, is breaking down because of the burdens thrown upon it. Does the right hon. Gentleman propose to relieve the land of those burdens? If so, he is justifying the policy put forward by the Chancellor of the Exchequer; or does he propose nationalisation, or does he propose the policy of breaking up estates and putting the land into the hands of many more holders? He has left us in a fog as to what he proposes, though we are all in agreement that land is overburdened. In the first part of his speech he seemed to show that he had some difficulty in getting rid of the distinction between the ownership of land and the ownership of other forms of investment. Hon. Members from Scotland on the Labour Benches, although they differ from me on the nationalisation of private property, have no difficulty in appreciating the essential distinction between the ownership of land and the ownership of an industrial investment. The land system in this country does not rest on a profit basis, does not rest on the ordinary basis of profit and loss as applied to industry, but rests on a social basis. I do not know whether they have the clan system in Wales, I suppose it has broken down there, but it has not broken down in Scotland. The right hon. Gentleman will find the spirit of the clan system running all through the land in Scotland.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: The land for the clan, not the land for the owners.

Mr. BUCHANAN: There is no Kidd clan!

Mr. KIDD: We will take the humour later. All through the land system we find that the land rests on a social basis. If I invest money in an industrial security, I do it for the return it will bring me and in the hope of an appreciation in the capital value, and so does
the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs. If I inherit an estate in land, I do not expect that I am going to get an increase in the capital value of it. Some Members may say that I have no right to hold it, that I have no right to gratify the sentiment, of retaining acres that have been in my family for generations. If while in possession of that land my people have sought to house their farmers well and their cottagers well, and have let them have land at the lowest possible price, in order to stimulate successful agriculture, they have done a service which, normally, distinguishes the position of the landowner from that of the holder of an industrial investment.
Again I come back to Scotland, and I speak with some knowledge of land. In Scotland we are dealing with a difficult climate, with a soil which naturally is not too fruitful. Does any hon. Member believe it would have been possible to develop the agriculture of Scotland to the point of excellence it has reached but for this close co-operation of laird and tenant, where the laird enjoyed the prestige of his possession of land and against that prestige has had to balance the relatively low rent at which the land was let? The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs has talked glibly about monopoly value. What is happening at the present time? The solidarity of a lot of old estates is being destroyed by the heavy burdens put upon the land. The land comes into the market, and farmers have to pay heavy-prices for it. Luckily for them, they are called on to pay these heavy prices immediately after the period of war profits has placed them in a fairly good position. But there is this consideration above and beyond all else, that we are now getting rid of the social element in land, and once we have got rid of that, once we have got rid of the factor represented by the sacrifice which the landowner made for the sake of social prestige, the price of land is bound to rise.
I am not holding a brief for any landowner, but I appreciate how much agriculture has owed to the mere fact that land rests on a social basis. As Labour Members are not getting nationalisation at this time I appeal to them to balance the present system, under which the farmer
works the land with the benefit of the landowner's capital at the lowest price, a system which leaves the farmer the largest possible amount of his capital for working the land, against some other system under which the capital of the farmer is so tied up in the land that he is impoverished for the task of working it. What the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs has proved is that it is time we made a beginning in relieving land of its burdens. Reference has been made to the differentiation already made between land and other property. Take the question of local rates. If I have a factory, on what do I pay local rates? My income from that business may be very large, but I pay local rates only on the little bit of building, it may be a very little bit; but if I am a landowner I pay rates on the whole of the land. The captain of industry pays the rates on his building only, he does not pay rates on his raw material—which is what the land is to the farmer. There is a great deal to be said for the argument that agricultural land let by the landowner to the farmer should not be rateable at all, but should be regarded as raw material, and, with the exception of the value of one or two buildings, no rates should be imposed on the land. If that policy had been pursued, land would to-day have been enjoying a prosperity which for the moment it has lost.
We welcome the action of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, for though it is not a very big concession we see in the action a realisation on the part of this Government of its duty to land, a realisation that it is about time for us to turn back on our trail. We have gone too far in the direction of inciting the public against the landowner. Land being visible, as an industrial investment is not, I could, if I were a man without principle, excite feeling against landowners—because their property is visible. One could talk about monopoly value and about the leisured rich; but I would appeal to my Labour friends above the Gangway, if they cannot get nationalisation, to agree with me that the landowner has suffered from excessive burdens and that there was nothing wrong with the old system, that on the contrary it was a great system. The Prime Minister has been appealing for a return of the
social instinct in industry. What we want in industry is more of the spirit that has prevailed throughout the centuries. Give us the same social sense in industry and I might almost be a follower of the representatives of Clydebank. We welcome the Chancellor of the Exchequer's attitude as being one that indicates that this Government are determined, while not doing anything over generous, to act towards the land with complete fairness, regardless of how they may be misrepresented in the country.

Major Sir ARCHIBALD SINCLAIR: Listening to the speech of the Chancellor of the Exchequer has only deepened the impression which I gained two nights ago of the mistaken sense of fairness, the inexpediency and the unwisdom of his proposals with regard to Death Duties on agricultural land. All who are interested in the future of agriculture must agree that at least one good result has come from this controversy, and that is that the imagination, the driving force and the inventive powers of the Chancellor of the Exchequer have been enlisted in the solution of the problem of agriculture. He has not hitherto been conspicuous for his knowledge of or the interest he has taken in agricultural problems, and that may account for the fact that he was not sufficiently acquainted a few months ago, when he introduced his Budget, with the circumstances which he has been so vividly describing. It was only after an agitation conducted from the benches behind by Private Members and by institutions which exist to serve the interests of the landed property class that he has introduced the proposals which we are discussing this afternoon. The fact that he has not hitherto taken this interest in the problem of agriculture may also account for the difficulty which he tells us he experienced in following the argument of my right hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). He said that my right hon. Friend in the first part of his speech represented the landlords as being bloated and prosperous, and as asking, "Why are you giving this additional advantage to the landed class?" My right hon. Friend said nothing of the sort. What he did say was, that in addition to the agricultural value of land which the landlord receives there are other fictitious values under the present system
—the monopoly value, the social value, the value which is given, as the hon. Member for Linlithgow (Mr. Kidd) said, by the social prestige afforded by the ownership of land, and there is the sporting value of land. When an estate or any part of it is realised for Death Duties or for any other purpose the owner receives cash for all these values. Therefore, the community say, and the owners of every form of property say, "If we have to pay on the full value of our property, it is only fair that the landowner should pay on the full value of his property."
It is absurd to speak as though Death Duties are the only thing that force landed estates into the market. Everybody knows that landlords have been hit by a great number of other causes. They had great expenses to meet immediately after the War for reconstruction work on their estates, and many of them have had to pay off their debts—the banks came down upon them and forced them to realise part of their property. If estates are being realised, as they are being, and landowners are receiving all the values of the property, the agricultural value, the sporting value, the social value, the amenity value, then the whole community will say, and the predominantly urban electorate especially—I appeal to Members from rural constituencies to note this—that landowners ought to pay on the same basis as all other owners of property.
My right hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) illustrated his argument by referring to the case of a man living in a town who had the choice of investing his money either in an industry in that town or in the ownership of land. He pointed out that if he invested in industry adding to the economic wealth of the country he would have to pay upon the additional scale of Death Duties, but if he invested in the ownership of land he would not have to pay that increase. He might have gone further and said that if this man invested his money in tenant farming and employed men on the land to reclaim it, and cultivate it and bring it into a higher state of production, he would then have to pay the higher rate of Death Duty, whereas if the land was merely transferred to him from some
other person, he would only have to pay at the lower rate of taxation.
The Chancellor of the Exchequer has put the case for the proposed remission of the Death Duties, first of all on the ground of justice and equity to the individual, and under that heading he mentioned one justification. The right hon. Gentleman said it costs the landlord more to realise his estate and transfer it than it does in the case of other forms of property. I think that is quite an arguable proposition. The hon. and gallant Member for Ashford (Major Steel) had an Amendment on the Paper dealing with that point, but you cannot base upon a case for a concession to meet a particular hardship an argument for a general exemption from a duty which applies to every other form of property. It is, however, from the point of view of the welfare of the industry that the case has been argued by hon. Members on the back benches opposite. They have pointed to the scarcity of capital in the industry in every country and that is a very serious problem which those interested in agriculture have to face.
This affects not only the landlord but also the tenant farmer. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs said that a large number of tenant farmers would be liable to the increased scale of Death Duties under the proposals being made this year, and he said that they would not share in the remission which was being given to the landowners, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer tried to make out that the number affected would be very small. I have here a list of 32 farms in a parish in Berwickshire, and out of these 32 there are three cases in which the tenant farmers' interest will be affected. In one case the capital of the tenant farmer amounts to £18,000, in another case £14,000, and in the third case £16,000, and in each of these cases the tenant will be liable for the increased scale of duties and the landlord will be exempt under the Chancellor of the Exchequer's proposal. If you take the landlord's interest in the land and add it to the tenant's interest, there will be a large number of occupying tenants who would have a capital in excess of the £12,500 provided for under this proposal. Are you only going to give exemption to the land-owning interest? Take the case of an occupying owner whose landlord's
capital is £7,500, and the tenant's capital is £7,000, making a total of £14,500. Will he be assessed under the new scale of duties, or will he be given a remission only in respect of his actual interest as landowner.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The total value of his own estate from all sources will be taken as the basis on which the scale of Death Duties will be fixed, and the agricultural part of the estate will be chargeable at the low rate.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: That is what I thought, and I think it works out very unfairly. If there was a landowner and a tenant farmer in the illustration I have given the landowner's interest would be £7,500 and the tenant farmer's capital £7,000, and the farmer would not come in for the increased taxation at all.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Naturally he comes under the rates appropriate to the higher scale.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: Therefore these men would escape only in respect of their occupying interest, whereas if they were tenant farmers they would not have to pay on their tenant farming interest. The hon. Member for Romford said he would always be ready to stand up for the good landlords. But we must not be blind to the fact that there are a number of landlords who are bad—not morally bad—but bad from the economic point of view or regarded as partners in the agricultural industry. From many points of view I think it is a good thing to have large estates broken up. Bacon said that property is like muck. The more it is spread the better it is. But recently, when land has passed out of the hands of the old landowning families it has too often fallen into the hands of men who have obtained it for social prestige, or the sporting value which it possesses. One particular case has been mentioned of an estate in Scotland which has been almost entirely broken up, and has been bought for the most part by rich men who come there to obtain good sport, and they are now planting coverts for pheasants on arable land.

Mr. CHURCHILL: This relief does not apply to deer forests.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: No, this relief does not apply to deer forests but would apply
to the case of those who buy mixed property, and it would apply to the agricultural side of those estates. The land to-day is mostly in the hands of those who have bought it since the War, and who have purchased it for its amenities and sporting value. My point is that the people who have bought all this land for its sporting value, its amenity value, or its social value will share in the benefits which are now being bestowed on land by the proposals of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will at any rate confine his concession to those who are playing their proper part in the industry, and who are concentrating their attention on the development of the agricultural side of their estates and keeping them in a good state of repair and increasing production.
There was an Amendment on the Paper standing in the name of the hon. Member for Ashford and others which would have given relief to estates in regard to expenditure on maintenance and repairs, and the upkeep of farms. That Amendment and other Amendments of that character struck me as being something that would assist the agricultural industry, whereas the proposals now being put forward by the Chancellor of the Exchequer are not designed to assist the agricultural industry, but are providing benefits which will go mainly to the landlords. I cannot understand why the Government should run counter to those modern conceptions upon which the Chancellor of the Exchequer claimed in his opening speech to have framed his Budget expounded when the right hon. Gentleman introduced his Budget. The Chancellor of the Exchequer complained the other night of the exaggeration which he said had characterised speeches on this question from the Liberal Benches, and he stated that this was a very small point—merely the remission of something like £500,000.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I was only quoting the language of my hon. Friend opposite

Sir A. SINCLAIR: The Chancellor of the Exchequer certainly said that he deprecated the exaggeration of the importance of the proposals which he had heard from the Liberal Benches, and he said that this was quite a small thing simply to overcome the difficulties of transferring estates at death. The hon.
Members who have supported this Amendment have put this question on very different grounds. As a matter of fact any exaggeration on this question came originally from hon. Members on the Government side. I do not, however, think that they have indulged in undue exaggeration because hon. Members who have spoken from those benches have spoken with a full knowledge of the seriousness of this question, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer is deceiving himself if he thinks the picture they have drawn was in any degree exaggerated. Arable land is giving way to grass; grass land is becoming depreciated and waterlogged for lack of proper drainage; pasture land is going back to bracken and weeds; buildings are out of repair, out of date, out of scale; the head of stock is very largely restricted, and, as a result, the manurial values are lost by which the productivity of the soil could be increased.
All this will not be affected in any way by the Chancellor's proposal, because it does not apply to the tenant farmer. The landlords' difficulties are not solely due to Death Duties, but, as my right hon. Friend pointed out, to the accumulation of burdens, which has fallen upon the landlords in recent years, and have made it increasingly impossible for them to fulfil their functions in the industry. The present rate of Death Duties, as Lord Bledisloe, the Parliamentary Secretary to the Ministry of Agriculture in the present Government, has said, means the extinction of the present landowning families in two generations, and the people who are buying the land under the present system are not people with the old traditions of interest in the agricultural industry and of love for the countryside, but are people who are buying the land mainly for the sporting and amenity values which they obtain. Therefore, it seems to me that these proposals will only have the effect of dragging agriculture down into the arena of party politics; they will push the most vulnerable and least popular partner in the industry into the forefront of public discussion and criticism; they will arouse the deepest suspicion in the minds of the urban electorate as to the Government's attitude towards the whole question, and will prejudice the discussion by the urban electorate of the Government's agricul-
tural proposals when they are finally evolved and brought forward, and they will be ultimately fatal to the interest of those on whose behalf these exemptions have been designed.
They will do all this without doing anything, I do not say to cure the present condition of agriculture, because that is not the business of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but without doing anything to arrest the processes I have described. They are due to the conditions which now exist, and the only effect of the Chancellor's proposal is to give exemption from the new burdens which are being imposed. The old burdens, however, will persist, and the consequences will continue. The Financial Secretary just now spoke of the tendency towards the breaking up of estates, and said that agriculture would adapt itself gradually to the new conditions. But the very reverse is taking place. It is too late to talk about the tendency towards the breaking up of estates; they are being broken up. Twenty-five per cent. of the land of the country now is in the occupation of occupying owners. It is too late to talk in that way, and, far from the agricultural system adapting itself to the new conditions, it is deteriorating and going from bad to worse.
Hon. Members must realise that it is true to say that there is now in operation a revolution in the countryside, due, in the first place, to the democratic tendencies and modern conceptions to which the right hon. Gentleman referred in opening his Budget. The hon. Member for York (Sir J. Marriott), in an interesting book on the land question, has said that the accumulating burdens were preventing landlords from fulfilling their functions, and that, again, is another cause of this revolution. Mr. Harling Turner, in an interesting article in the "Glasgow Times" of the 19th January, said that he knew of many cases where farmers, by judicious selection of grass seeds and appropriate treatment of the land, are now making, not the proverbial two, but four or five blades of grass grow where one grew before, and the capital of these farmers will now be attacked under the right hon. Gentleman's proposal. The march of science and the spread of education are favourable features in this revolution in the countryside of Britain, and they are features which the right hon.
Gentleman ought to do everything he can to help; but there is nothing in the Government's proposal to help tenant farmers who want capital in order to make use of the fruits of scientific research. Mr. Harling Turner, who is a very great expert and is tie Commissioner of the Duke of Portland, went on to say in his article:
In a very short time there will be anything from 60 to 70 per cent. of our arable land requiring re-draining.
That was under the present system, before the additional Death Duties were proposed. Therefore, as my right hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs said, if under the present system the landlords are incapable of carrying out these functions—they have not the money, but they are not to be blamed for that; the money is not in the industry to enable them to do it—it is apparent that the right hon. Gentleman's concessions will do nothing to help the industry in its present difficulties, and, as Lord Bledisloe has said, in two generations the estates of the existing landed families must be broken up. Therefore, it is not too much to say that a revolution is proceeding at the present time in the countryside, and it is absurd to suppose that you can arrest these processes of decay by the proposals which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made. I appeal, therefore, to the Government, and I appeal also to my fellow landlords and those who represent that interest on the other side of the Committee, not to snatch at this bone for which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Wells (Sir E. Sanders) sat up and begged, and which the Chancellor flung to him disdainfully, but rather to lend a hand and attempt to devise other means whereby the agricultural industry can be pulled together—other means for the revival of rural life in Britain, other means for repopulating the British countryside—and thus win honour and credit for the landowners of Great Britain.

Sir PHILIP PILDITCH: I could not help wondering, during the early part of the speech to which we have just listened, whether the hon. Baronet (Sir A. Sinclair) had really grasped the meaning of this Clause, because I understood him
to ask, why should not the excess value of agricultural landed property above the agricultural value be taxed—that is to say, the value which is derived from amenities, possible future building value, and so on? As I read the Clause, the excess value will be taxed, and it will be taxed on the higher scale; and may I mention, in the hearing of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that that is just what I am going to ask him to take into consideration? The estimated extra value will not only be taxed on the higher scale, but it will be so taxed now, before it can be realised. This excess value is a thing which may never be realised, or, if it is realised, it may not be realised for a great many years; and yet, as I gather from the Clause as it stands, the higher tax upon it will have to be paid now, on a death at the same time as the tax on the agricultural value of the estate. I do not know whether, between now and Report, my right hon. Friend would be prepared to take that point into consideration.
I think most people in the House who are interested in the condition of agriculture will be grateful to my right hon. Friend for the attempt he has made to meet the situation in some way. It does not go very far. Judging from part of the speech of the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), anyone would think it was a very serious and very far-reaching boon which was being granted to the agricultural industry, but I should like, in addition to pointing out that the tax on the extra part of the value of the property will be required to be paid now, to point out that the hon. Baronet and his Leader seemed to think that something in the nature of an unfortunate exemption, or unfair or too kindly treatment, is being granted to the agriculturist in these matters. I need not go into the general principle of that, because the argument developed by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs on that point has been already fully dealt with by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the question whether or not it is possible that exemption should be given or has been given to agriculture as against the rest of the community.
But I should like to point out that, very little in the way of an exemption
is granted, in favour of agriculture by this concession. When the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs was in the House, I ventured to remind him that it was he who originally changed the basis of the valuation of agricultural property, which, until 1910, was always calculated upon a number of years' purchase of the annual value. In 1910 the right hon. Gentleman, in his memorable Budget, altered that, so that the value of agricultural property was calculated on the value of the component parts of the estate, assuming the holdings to be separately submitted to public competition. Surely, the Committee will see that that is not a fair way of valuing property at any specific moment, such as the moment of death. You arrive at a false and too high value by assuming then that you could wait for a long period of years while each separate component part of an agricultural property was put into the market at the most favourable time, but every other kind of property is valued as at the moment of death, when the tax becomes payable. Therefore, in nine cases out of 10, the changed system brought in by the right hon. Gentleman in 1910, has increased unfairly the amount which agriculture has to pay by way of Death Duties as compared with the rest of the community.
Because of that principle, laid down for the first time in 1910, I doubt very much whether there is anything in this new Clause of the Chancellor of the Exchequer that is of the nature of exceptionally favourable treatment of agriculture. In 1919 the scales of duty were increased, and in order that the Committee may understand how the situation really stands with regard to the question of the Budget scale of duties and the exemption according to this Clause, I should like to point out what the effect would be upon an agricultural property of reasonable size. I ought, perhaps, at once to say that I have no personal interest in this matter. I am an exceedingly small landowner. I only own a small manorial property in my native County of Devon, which I bought because it happened to have been in the possession of my forbears two or three hundred years ago, and, as far as I know, there is no building value attaching to it, and there is certainly no social or
amenity value to me. Therefore, I am not likely to be affected whether this Clause is passed or not. I simply know sufficient of how it would affect larger properties by the experience I have as a small landowner myself.
If you take an estate worth £40,000, under the scale of duties before the Budget was brought in the owner paid on death £4,000, at 10 per cent. of the value. If that estate were producing 2 per cent. on that £40,000, and, as: most Members know, the outgoings on agricultural estates make that statement not an unfair one, that means that there is an income of £800 a year from that property. To pay the Death Duties under the scale of 1919 represents five complete years' income of that estate. How is that money going to be found? The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs seemed to-day not to mind the process of the breaking up of estates. He did not think that in 1919, when he made that memorable speech at Caxton Hall which a good many of us heard, nor in 1920, when he was passing—and I in those days was following him into the Lobby—the Corn Production Act, nor, indeed, did he think it so lately as two years ago, when he made that very sensible speech in this House about December, 1923, in which he was dealing with the state of the agricultural industry, and did justice to the position of the landowners, who, he said, were the people from whom the capital was always found, though it was not now being found so readily as it used to be, for the purpose of building, drainage, and all the accessories without which farming cannot be carried on with profit.
I should like to compare that £4,000, which was the amount which would be payable under the position before the Bill, with the position after the Bill. That has been increased from £4,000 to £5,200. All the Chancellor of the Exchequer does by this Clause is to put the agricultural-owner back from having to pay £5,200, which would represent something like 6½ years' income of the property, to what it was before the Budget was brought in. He puts us back to a sum which amounts to five years' income of the property. I would suggest to him, that by next year he might use his ingenuity to
find a way in which he could put back the condition of agriculture in this matter to something like the position in which it was before the change which was effected in 1910, which did a good deal to damage the industry, as affecting landowners, tenant occupiers, and labourers as well.
With reference to the breaking up of estates. It has been estimated that 80 per cent. of such sales are to occupying tenants, who borrow two-thirds of the money to pay for them on mortgage. The mortgage interest usually exceeds the inclusive rent hitherto paid. Tithe, repairs and other outgoings are transferred, on such a sale, from the owner to the owner-occupant, and the latter consequently is crippled for want of capital. The result of that is that economies have to be effected in labour and in the use of feeding stuffs and manures, and there is a falling off in the standard of conditions of farming and the equipment of the land, deterioration of buildings and decreased production with disastrous results to all classes concerned in agriculture. I hope therefore that, as a step though small, in the direction of minimising this injury to the industry and the State, the Committee will pass this small and certainly justifiable concession.

Mr. CHURCHILL: May I remind the Committee that time is getting on, and there are a good many Amendments on the Paper to this Clause. It was understood that we should get the conclusion of the new Clauses by a quarter-past eight, to enable us to get on to the Schedules at such an hour as not to lead to a very prolonged sitting. That was the general understanding. Of course, the Committee is master of its own time, but, if the other two Clauses are to be discussed at all, I suggest that we ought to be very short on this general Debate.

Mr. SNOWDEN: I know nothing about any understanding that the Clauses were to be finished by a quarter-past eight. This is a very important Clause indeed. Of course, the right hon. Gentleman wants to get on with the Bill, but a number of my friends want to speak, and I do not think we could finish the discussion just now. Perhaps he will let it go
on a little while, and see if it shows any disposition to come to a close.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I readily assent to that. I only struck a note of warning. The Government are entirely in the hands of the Opposition in regard to the way the time is used.

Mr. WHEATLEY: I will respond to some extent to the appeal which is suggested in the remarks of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and will endeavour to confine my remarks within a very short space. The discussion of this Clause has very naturally turned on the condition of agriculture. In my opinion, the Committee could not be discussing a more important subject. The condition of agriculture is a determining factor in the prosperity of any country, and, if I could have detected in the proposal which has now come from the other side any glimmering of a policy of reconstruction, I should have felt considerable difficulty in entering a word of criticism or of opposition to such a proposal. Had there been any indication on the part of the Government that they were taking a big view of the question of the condition of agriculture and its relations to the general industrial state of the country, I think any party which put any unnecessary difficulty in the way would have been guilty of national conduct which was open to very severe criticism. But, as I say, I can find no glimmering at all of any policy of that kind here.
What is the state of affairs, taking a broad view of it, with which we are confronted to-day? We have an agricultural industry, which was wrecked during the 19th century particularly, and now we are face to face, in the industrial and national situation, with the results of that wrecking. It comes very badly from the Liberal party particularly to be taking up the time of the House and the country with statements deploring the state of our agriculture, because all down through the past century the Liberal party had considerable political power, and they had behind that political power a great volume of industrial power, and all that political power and all that industrial power was used, intentionally, for the purpose of ruining agriculture in order to provide for a new industrial system, the cheap labour, and what they regarded as
the cheap commodities which were essential to the creation of industrial millionaires. They had not any very serious opposition from the party opposite, who claim, and have some reason to claim, to represent the agricultural industries.
7.0 P.M.
That being the state of affairs we are up against, we have to deal with it, whatever may be our views of the history of it, and to whomsoever the blame may be attributed. Reference has been made to the change that has taken place in the land tenure of the country since the period of the War. I have not had time to ascertain the figures, but I believe in Scotland since the War, one-third of the farms have passed out of the hands of landlords into the hands of occupying owners—into the hands of the people who work the land. There would have been a policy if the Chancellor had brought forward a proposal for assisting those who were engaged in the working of the land. It could have been argued very strongly that, at any rate, here was a method by which people who were performing work of the very highest national importance were being relieved in a way which would prevent anyone else from absorbing the Parliamentary relief. But when you come forward and ask us to assist agriculture, that is the production of food, by giving a relief to the owning class who toil not, who contribute nothing to the production, but who rely for their incomes on the exploitation of the farming class, we are entitled to say that is a way of granting relief that does not appeal to us as a method of assisting agriculture. I said there was no policy. The policy might be this, that there are still on the benches opposite a number of supporters of the Chancellor of the Exchequer who suspect his present political faith, and that it is necessary to give a sop to them in order to ensure the stability of the Chancellor in his newly-found political position. But that is not an argument or a reason which appeals to people on this side of the House. We have been taught to regard the Chancellor of the Exchequer as a person of reckless courage, a person who would bring forward bold proposals, who might make mistakes and involve us in heavy losses, but, at any rate, a person
who was prepared to take risks. There is no sign of courage or of a comprehensive grasp of the national situation in the proposal which we are discussing here. It is paltry in the extreme, and the very pettiness of the proposal is being used as an argument for its serious consideration by the House. In the opinion of those for whom I speak, it is too small and too mean to deserve serious consideration. We are faced at the moment with an industrial situation in which, at the rate of fifty thousand a week, our industrial workers are being thrown on the streets. That is a situation which demands the most serious attention of the House and of the responsible Members of the House. Instead of dealing with that situation in a manner that would be creditable to the Government of this country and to its Parliament, we are dealing with a paltry proposal to give half-a-million a year to the political friends of the Chancellor of the Exchequer. For these reasons, the Members for whom I speak will oppose this Clause.

Mr. MacLAREN: I have taken great interest in the Debate this afternoon, because this subject has a very keen interest for me. I could not help thinking how well it rounds off the general scheme of affairs in the hands of the present Chancellor of the Exchequer. Very skilfully he has introduced the thin end of the wedge of Protection, with great skill he has introduced Colonial preference, and now the blessed Trinity of Conservatism is finding a vent in giving expression to a preference to the landowners of England. I am sure they will congratulate him when he consummates their desires and finally passes over the Budget to them. I was not in the House on the night when this new proposal was made known, but I understand the right hon. Member for Wells (Sir R. Sanders) was the person who extricated the confession from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I have always looked upon the Member for Wells as summing up all that innocent complacency of landlordism which always gets its own way. When we least expected it, out came this concession to the most dangerous and powerful vested interest in this country.
I want to say, in the most friendly way, that if the idea behind this special
concession to the landowners is that it is doing something to assist agriculture, I think it is a futile, and a dishonest statement to make, to say that it is encouraging agriculture at all. It is only a few months ago that we handed over subsidies for beet growing. In 1923 we handed over to the landowners great concessions with regard to agricultural rates. In 1896 we reduced the agricultural rates by one-half, and in 1923 we reduced them again down to a quarter. I see, according to an answer given by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that in the year 1922–23 we paid out by way of Government grants to make up the requirements for local rates £1,503,000, and then, after the passing of the Agricultural Rates Act of 1924, the grant from the Treasury to make up the payments for the agricultural rates of that year amounted to £4,725,000. The poor depressed landowner gets off with a quarter of his rates, and the general taxpayer of the country is asked to make up the rates.

Lord ERSKINE: If the hon. Member will allow me to interrupt him, does he not believe that the farmers get very large benefits?

Mr. MacLAREN: I do not envy the man who gets what is left from the table after dinner is over. I was dealing with the concessions made in regard to agricultural rates and the concessions that are always made to landowners. [An HON. MEMBER: "What about the tenant?"] We always hear about the tenant, because it is always the tenant who is put forward. When you introduced the Corn Production Bill it was for the benefit of the tenants, and what happened? No sooner was that Act passed than the landowners of this country went to the farmers and compelled them in many cases either to give up farms altogether or to buy them at increased values. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] I am merely quoting the facts from the statements in the "Estate Gazette." I am only quoting statements in Government White Papers. Why, as a result of the Corn Production Act, we found the landowners and the agriculture owners of that kind reaping the benefit in increased values and forcing many farmers to buy farms at increased value, and in 1923 we
had to pass the Agricultural Credits Act to help the farmers to pay off the debts that were hanging over them as a result of these purchases. One could spend many hours going over and reiterating the many concessions made to landowners, all on the plea that it is to benefit the tenant in agriculture.
When the Agricultural Rates Act was in Committee in 1923 I moved that if the Committee were anxious to assist agriculture, instead of relieving the rates on the land they should relieve the rates that are levied on the farmers' buildings, but I was ruled out of order. In hon. Gentlemen on the other side are very anxious to help the farmers and agriculture in this country, let them relieve the taxation on the industry of the farmer who is using the land. When I looked at the Chancellor of the Exchequer and when I listened to the speeches that have been made this afternoon, it came to my mind that there was no man in this country who knows this point better than the Chancellor of the Exchequer. When I was a young lad in Glasgow I used to read his speeches on this very question, and for many months after I went about Scotland with his famous Dundee land speech in my pocket from which I learned a great deal. There is no man in this House who has made more pronouncements on this very point, namely, that the only way to benefit agriculture—and I am using his exact words—is to take the rates and taxes levied on the users of the land off the users' improvements and levy those rates and taxes on the capitalised monopoly values of the soil of the country.

Mr. CHURCHILL: That is not an exact quotation.

Mr. MacLAREN: It is the sense. It is more than exact, because it is a re-expression of the actual spirit of it. I will make this confession, that it is not as eloquent as his remark was, but it is the meaning of the whole of his speeches at Dundee and Manchester.

Mr. CHURCHILL: That speech was devoted to an argument designed to show that it was desirable to rate urban land upon its true economic value

Mr. MacLAREN: I wish the Chancellor of the Exchequer would make that con-
fession now instead of the one he is trying to put through in this new Clause. I was merely saying that the Chancellor of the Exchequer knows his case very well, and that it must be something in the nature of reiteration for us to produce this argument now. The Chancellor has made this gift to the Members behind him. The Landowners' Union have been demanding for years that certain concessions ought to be made on the Death Duties, and then they have got behind them the so-called Farmers' Union and have been making them lisp the same demand, that something ought to be done by way of reducing the Death Duties and the rates and taxes on agriculture. I wonder if the Committee will mind if I read this little quotation from a resolution passed by Danish agricultural people a few years ago. I hope the Committee will listen to these words, because they rather set off the contrast between the condition of mind in this country and in Denmark. This resolution was passed in 1902 at a conference of agricultural workers of Denmark, and they said in it:
Our occupation and progress cannot be virtually supported by any help from the State or from any other class in the community. We can only prosper if the law fully recognises that the smallholders and all other classes of the community have equal rights.
I would like British farmers and everyone just to take these last few words to heart:
The smallholders, therefore, do not ask any favours by way of taxation in Denmark. All we demand is the freedom to use our land free from the imposts of tariffs and other forms of taxation.
That was in a country which is setting an example to the whole of Europe in the development of agriculture. But here in England, under an antiquated system of agriculture, you have the landlords—whether it be the old form of landlordism, which is no better than the new, or the new form of landlordism—keeping agriculture hopelessly in their deadly grip, and then super-imposed on that you have your iniquitous system of taxing and rating the improvements of the farmer and holding up the development of land in this country. Those are the real causes of the degradation of agriculture in this country, and, although I am not at all enthusiastic over Death Duties in this way, or in that
or the other way, if there is going to be a concession made with regard to Death. Duties, and a concession of the character of that in this new Clause, it might have been given to people who really toil and work and do something for their existence rather than to those who merely-send agents to collect rents and keep a good eye on the rising value of future rents. Landowning, as we know it in England, as long as it stands and enjoys the privileges which it now enjoys, is bound, sooner or later, to bring this country to utter disruption. As the right hon. Member for Shettleston (Mr. Wheatley) has truly said, week after week, we increase in the numbers of our unemployed, while outside our own country the international market is closing down against us. Every country is becoming self-contained. We are no longer the manufacturer of the world. At home, we have a million and a half unemployed walking our streets, and I see no alternative before this country other than that of opening up the entire resources of England and Scotland, opening up the land of this country, in order to give healthy employment in this country to these men, rather than allowing than to become degenerate upon doles from the Employment Exchange.
I want to appeal to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I have enjoyed his sparring across the Table as much as any man; I admire his ability, and I have relished many of the phrases which he has used and many of his similes; but I realise that outside this House there is the tragedy of our unemployed people walking the streets and constantly looking for relief, looking for some outlet that will take them off the streets and give them some healthy occupation, if for nothing else than to produce their own food. Here we have this magnificent land of England lying idle to-day; thousands of acres under water and thousands of acres going to grass of an inferior character. Is it not an indictment of modern civilisation that in this country, with the magnificent people we have, our people should be driven to traversing the streets under the shadow of poverty, fear and degradation, whilst the most magnificent land in Europe, perhaps, the land of England, is lying in
such a damnable condition as we find it to-day?
I appeal to the Chancellor of the Exchequer and to many hon. Members on the opposite side of the House, who are just as much concerned about this question as any hon. Member on this side, that surely the time has come for something bigger, something more imaginative and something that will give our people hope that there is in this country opportunity for the people, and that instead of driving them on to the streets they will be given a chance by the opening up of this magnificent heritage of ours, the land of England. Are you going to do it by this tinkering, niggling method of giving relief in regard to Death Duties. Surely, the Chancellor of the Exchequer will not contest this point, that the idea behind the concession of Death Duties is to give every encouragement possible to the users of agricultural land. Surely the idea behind all the concessions we have been making to agriculture is to help agriculture along.
My point is that we on these benches will do all we can to assist any body of men in this House who will give any touch of imagination to the agriculturists of this country to open up the marvellous opportunities of our own land for labour; but we do think that the opportunity is being missed. It is all very well to come here and talk and argue with one another and make flippant speeches, and to think when we go home that we have done a good day's work. We have not done our duty when we have done that. We are sent to this House to give the nation a lead on these matters and to do something to solve this great problem. Therefore, I appeal to the Committee to realise the seriousness of the position and to rise to its opportunities. The Chancellor of the Exchequer's reasons for his concession are nonsensical, infinitesimal, and tantalising to the hungry people outside. I appeal to the Committee, viewing the situation outside, viewing the enormous opportunities in this country to give employment to the masses of our people, that they should urge the Government to do something of real worth and value, and open up the resources of this country by removing the deadly hand of monopoly. If they do that, they will gain the
eternal gratitude of the people of this country, and if they do not, well, what will be the consequences? I hope that what I am about to say will not be considered an irrelevant digression. [Laughter.] It is all very well for hon. Members to laugh. I correlate everything that I hear in this House with the fundamental right of every human being to the use of this earth.

The CHAIRMAN: I gathered that the hon. Member was speaking in regard to the giving of greater concessions to agriculture. Now I understand that he wishes to put forward some entirely new scheme, which has nothing to do with the scheme we are discussing.

Mr. MacLAREN: The moment I do that I will agree that I am getting out of order. When I was laughed at for my earnest appeal in regard to this matter, I was merely saying that every economic problem which is obsessing this House and causing so many hours' debate—it may be a queer state of mind on my part, but I am prepared to accept it—brings me to this point, that I always correlate it with the fundamental rights of human beings to get at the opportunities embedded in the soil and to make them freer men than they are to-day. If we do not do something bigger than we are proposing to do this afternoon, if we do not more seriously tackle the problem of agriculture and the opening up of the land for use, something that will commend itself more than the proposition that is made this afternoon, the Home Secretary may worry as he likes about Bolshevism and about preventing people from coming here from foreign countries to propagate revolutionary ideas, but the poverty and the degradation in our midst will do more to arouse the people against the Constitution than all the armies that ever came from Russia to propagate ideas from that country.
It is because I am correlating all these things at the back of my mind and, perhaps, putting them crudely to the Committee, that I am making this appeal for something bigger than anything proposed in this Clause, because this Clause is nothing more nor less than the continuing of the old dreary steps and the old process of safeguarding the interests of the landowners, and keeping the rook-bottom constitution of the Tory party intact.

Mr. HARNEY: I had not the pleasure of being here when this proposal was made. It is an eleventh hour proposal, though I believe it was made at one o'clock in the morning. As I understand it, it comes to this. First of all, you are to value an estate in the ordinary way. Then you are to ascertain the agricultural value, and you are only to bring the excess value under the increased Death Duties. It is very curious that, when the Chancellor of the Exchequer entertained us so much in his Budget speech by the variety and the nicety of his balance, he entirely omitted to take this into account. It has completely upset the balance and put him out.
As I understood it, his balance was this. He said, "I am going to set off what I have taken from the Super-tax by an equivalent increase in the Death Duties. It is £10,000,000 in each case. That adjustment has been so well worked out that it will strike more or less the same people." To use his own graphic phrase, "It will take from the living hand and add the same amount to the dead hand." But when one examines it one finds that the living hand from which the burden would be taken will be the hand that has at least £2,000 a year, and the dead hand that would be added to would be the hand that had £12,000, that is, £600 a year. That was the idea as he opened it. Now comes this proposal, and we are told that even those who otherwise would be subject to Death Duties for the purpose of this adjustment, are to be relieved if they answer the description of agricultural landowners.
I hope the Chancellor of the Exchequer will bear with me if I try to reduce his proposal to something concrete and understandable. Suppose you have two gentlemen who die and each is worth £40,000. One of them has invested his £40,000 in an estate in the Surrey hills. The other has invested his £40,000 in a Manchester cotton mill. The successor of the gentleman who has invested his £40,000 in Surrey finds that the amount of Death Duty he has to pay is reduced by £2,000. The other gentleman whose predecessor invested in the cotton mill in Manchester finds that he has to pay the full increase in the Death Duties. Why is this particular favour given to the landowner? It is said that he has been
very hardly hit and that farming ought to be encouraged as much as possible. As far as I can see, there is no encouragement given to the real producer of the soil. Is the person who gets this relief of a couple of thousand pounds going to do any more fencing, any more fertilising of the land, or going to give any reduction in rent? Is it suggested that there will be another bushel of wheat grown or another stone of potatoes turned out because of this concession? Then why should it be made? Why should there be this discrimination between two classes of property?
We are told that the poor tenant farmer is the one person who should have our sympathy. If you had the whole of the estate represented by the tenant farmer he would get no concession, but if it were represented by the freeholder he would get the concession. You give the concession not to the person who puts money into the land but to the person who takes money out of the land, that is, the landowner. I am at a complete loss to know what is the justification for this midnight oil. The Chancellor of the Exchequer endeavoured to give us some reason, but he gave us nothing, although there was a certain amount of by-play as to the past doings of himself and the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). I have not yet heard from any side of the House any real reason why this concession should be given to a class who, admittedly, are not going to use it for the purpose of increasing production, and should be denied to a class who, if they got it, would use it for production. Is there anybody who says, or who can support it if he does say it, that the landowner who gets this concession of a couple of thousand pounds is going to use it to enable the farmers on his estate to produce more? [HON. MEMBERS: "Yes."] If so, in what way is he going to do it? To start with he is under no legal compulsion. Therefore what you do is that for the sake of agriculture you make a concession to a man who is under no legal obligation to apply the benefit of that concession to agriculture, and whose only obligation is at best a moral one, and you deny it to the person who would turn it to the benefit of agriculture, namely, the farmer. I shall vote against this Amendment.

Mr. N. MACLEAN: I intend to oppose this New Clause. I am one of those few who were in the House at an early hour in the morning when the Chancellor of the Exchequer sprang his surprise upon us by the statement that he was prepared to accept the Amendment down on the Paper in the name of several of his Friends on the benches behind him, and I think that he will remember, as will those who were in the House at the time, the storm which that announcement aroused on the benches on this side of the House. I am just as strong in protest now as I was then, having read the terms of the Clause which the Chancellor has put on the Paper.
The Chancellor, in that usual innocent manner of his, told the Committee first that he would accept the Amendment. Then he said that he would put forward a form of words on the Report stage in order to cover the point raised by his friends. He went on to say, when pressed in the Committee, that the Cabinet had discussed the matter, but he would not give us the form of words which he intended to place upon the Order Paper. The following morning the form of words which he could not give us at that early hour appeared on the Order Paper that was circulated to Members, which proves that there must have been either in his possession or in the possession of the Patronage Secretary, or of some Member of the Government the actual written form of the Amendment ready to be placed in the hands of the Clerk at the Table. [HON. MEMBERS: "NO!"] Evidently the Government Front Bench has changed its quarter. I am being informed now from the Front Bench below the Gangway that the words had not been written out, but I am only judging by what transpired, that at one o'clock in the morning though he had not the form of words to give to the House, which would give to hon. Members the information as to how he intended to get out of the difficulty, at 11 o'clock in the morning when the Order Papers were delivered to us this particular Motion was down, and it is from that point of view that I am submitting that either the right hon. Gentleman or some other Member of the Government must have had in his possession the form of words, or have received notice of the form of words which it was intended to put down.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The policy had been settled and the drafting of the Amendment was in progress, but at the time that this Amendment came on in the Committee the final drafting was not settled. It had been drafted in a rough form, but had not been finally settled, and when the Committee asked me to arrange for a discussion to-day, I sent the draftsman word late at night to complete the legal references necessary to put the draft in its complete form.

Mr. MACLEAN: I accept the explanation of the right hon. Gentleman, but I may point out that at that time we were taken by surprise, and in the few words which he addressed on the matter, the Chancellor himself—I do not say willingly—led us at any rate to take the view that he had not yet thought out the whole question, and consequently could not put down the exact form of words that would complete the concession which he desired to give to hon. Members behind him. I cannot see why this byplay has gone on between the right hon. Gentleman and his late leader and colleague, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). Both of them went round in the land campaign together. Both of them went round denouncing the landlords and calling them everything, they themselves being called everything by the landlords whom they were denouncing.

Mr. LANSBURY: And singing the "Land Song."

Mr. MACLEAN: I do not know that the Chancellor sang it, but he gave effect to the terms of the song in the speeches which he delivered. If he could not sing tunefully he spoke tunefully, and he persuaded the multitude to vote in favour of his land campaign. The point which I want to put is this: Not only were the two right hon. Gentlemen associated in that campaign, but they were associated in something else that happened in this House. That morning, early, when the Chancellor announced that he was going to accept the Amendment on the Paper, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs rose and said that the concession which the Chancellor was making was establishing a new precedent, was giving something back to the landlords in the shape
of remission of taxation. The Chancellor of the Exchequer said rightly that this was not a new precedent. I agree. The Chancellor of the Exchequer and the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs were members of a Cabinet which gave something back to the landlords, which abolished the land taxes that they had already put upon the landlords of this country in 1910. Both of them were in that Cabinet, and not only were both of them in the Cabinet, but both of them handed back to the landlords the amount of the taxation that had been paid by them since the introduction of the Land Budget in 1910. Here the Government are not offering to hand back to those people the duties which have been paid already on the land. That would have been the precedent right up to an exact parallel. But the principle is the same, and it is because I oppose the principle when applied by the Government of which the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs was Prime Minister, and also when applied by his late associate the Chancellor of the Exchequer, that I am opposing this now.
The Chancellor of the Exchequr has become exceedingly friendly with all the interests which he previously denounced and to which, he led people outside the country to believe, he was hostile so far as politics and his interest in politics were concerned. Now he hands those people a concession, a paltry concession he calls it. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] He admitted that it was not a great concession, and because it is not a great concession he was hopeful that the Committee would allow it to go through. But it is not the size of the concession, whether it be £500,000 or £5,000,000, which matters. It is not the actual sum which concerns me at the moment. The pernicious principle is involved in this Budget in which time after time he assured the Committee that he had no money with which to give concessions to the poor people of this country, that he could not take anything off tea, he could not give anything away on sugar, and that he could not take any thing off entertainments duties. Neither the necessaries of life of the poor of this country nor the trivial pleasures of the poor of this country could be assisted in any way, but when a gang of landlords through their representatives in this House come pleading for assistance and
put up their poor mouths, he says: "Certainly, I have the money already laid in the stocking for you. Here is the £500,000."
I submit that the people outside must be growing tired of all this pretence. They must be growing tired of the pretence of hon. and right hon. Members opposite that they are here representing the people. They are representing the vested interests in this country, and so long as I remain a member of this House and they are in power, I am going to protest in the name of the people whom I represent against those things. Reference has been made to the condition of the country, and from the benches below the Gangway on the other side many Government supporters have spoken about Members on these benches advocating not taxation of land, not concessions to landlords, but nationalisation. The right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs was asked, was that the alternative which he had to offer to the giving of relief to agriculture along the lines submitted by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I want to tell you frankly that we are not concerned with what methods are employed to get the land back to the people of this country, to get it out of the hands of those who are using the land not in the interests of the people, and not for the purpose of assisting the people of this country, but for their own selfish aggrandisement and for sporting purposes.
Sporting value! What better value can you get from land than the fact that you have human beings growing on it who will be a source of revenue to the country in future? Unfortunately what hon. Members opposite are doing is that they are giving assisted passages to these people to go to Africa, Australia or Canada. They allow the land to go out of cultivation and those people to go abroad, and then they come to this House and wail pitifully that this country cannot meet foreign competition, and that it is evidently going out of the race for the markets of the world. How can you expect this country to make headway in the world when you are doing everything you can merely to assist those who are sucking like vampires the life blood of the country? How can you expect the country to progress when you are crushing it through your ignorance, your stupidity and your wrongful methods of conducting
industry? You call yourselves captains of industry, but you are wrecking industry and not conducting it. If a captain of a ship put his vessel on the rocks in the way in which you are putting this country on the rocks he would be—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member is going far beyond the terms of the Amendment.

Mr. MACLEAN: I am certain that they cannot get their barque back to harbour. [HON. MEMBERS: "You are on the rocks!"] A lot of you are on the rocks after Ascot. I submit that this Amendment is simply mocking the people outside. It is mocking those who are looking for work and who are anxious to work. Go to any place which advertises a situation for only one man or woman, and you will see long queues of people waiting from an early hour to interview those who are responsible for giving the situation, wanting work while you are draining this country and doing everything you can by your stupidity and ignorance of what is good for the country to ruin it. As long as I am in this House or can speak on a platform outside, I will direct the attention of the people to this. You can call it agitation or Bolshevism, or anything you like, but I will do everything I can to arouse the passions of the people of the country outside, as well as their intelligence, to take you people down from the position which you occupy to-day.

Mr. WALLHEAD: It appears to me that the landlords are about the only people who can get any substantial relief from taxation, and they are the last people who ought to get it, because if there is one class more than another that has failed in its duty it is the landlord class. They are the people who have had the control of agriculture from time immemorial. It has been their boast that they have neglected merchanting and manufacturing because of their interest in agriculture, and at the end of their custodianship, after centuries, agriculture is becoming worse year by year, the agricultural population is dwindling, returns from the land are dwindling, and we are feeding far fewer people per acre than any other country in the world.
On a previous occasion a tax was put on the landlords of the country by the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George). He imposed a halfpenny land tax. Afterwards he took it off. The right hon. Gentleman has complained this afternoon about this remission, but he gave one himself. Then we saw the spectacle of the aristocracy of this country standing like beggars in the gate, holding out their hats and begging for the return of the halfpennies that they had paid the previous year. I agree with the last speaker. This remission is a disgrace, in view of the condition of the masses of the people. We have stood here pleading for some consideration for the poverty-stricken masses, who can get little or no relief. We have pleaded for remissions of the Sugar Duty, and other taxes on food, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer has talked about broadening the basis of taxation. Here he narrows it. He broadens it at one end and narrows it at the other. He broadens it for the workers and contracts it for the landlords.
The landlords have cursed this country in more ways than one. It is their policy that is responsible for our slums. It is their grab and greed that are responsible for the appalling condition of our towns. It is the landlord class that has cursed the mining industry with the exaction of royalties. If there had been some remission of the charges on mining, that would have helped the mining industry. Wherever the landlord class gets its hand on a thing it keeps it there. We intend to expose this policy as far as we can. While we have more than a million unemployed, and the number is being added to day by day, while land is derelict and there is no work for the unemployed on it, while reclamation and other schemes in connection with the land are held up, the landlords, thrice damned, are the people to whom the Chancellor of the Exchequer offers remission of taxation. If the Committee were wise it would throw this Clause back at the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and would insist that the landlord class should pay its fair share of taxation in the way it has not done hitherto. It is all very well for hon. Members to talk of what the landlord loses on agricultural land. What about the increased value of urban land?

The CHAIRMAN: The Clause deals only with Death Duties on agricultural land.

Mr. WALLHEAD: There is no need to take the charge off agricultural land, because the landlord as a rule has recouped himself from the town values which have been created without any effort on his part. There was an announcement in the Press that the town of Bootle, which was bought a few years ago by the Earl of Derby for £30,000, is now worth millions. There is an estate here in London—

The CHAIRMAN: Such cases are not affected by this Amendment. The case might be appropriate on the Second or Third Reading.

Mr. WALLHEAD: I will conclude by saying that I will assist the hon. Member for Govan (Mr. N. Maclean) in exposing this rank class legislation in the interests of the rich, Park Lane legislation, as against the slums and back alleys of our towns.

Mr. HARDIE: I am glad to see that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is present and in his full pontificals. When discussing the question of the landowner, we are apt to forget all that has been done for him. The one thing that I do not like about the Chancellor of the Exchequer is that, while he made a great flare about his Budget, he waited until the small hours of one morning in order to push into next day's business this inoffensive-looking Clause, which is designed to hand back something to his friends the landlords. Turning to the past, we find that a reduction was made in agricultural rates in 1923, and, in addition, in 1923–24, the grants from the Treasury amounted to £4,725,230. If it be true that land will secure a Higher rent because of this relief, then we may say that the grant of more than £4,000,000 in 1923–24 was a present of no less than £60,000,000 on capitalisation. Here is where we have to get right down to understanding what is meant by this innocent-looking Clause, especially in these days, when we have to listen to speech after speech as to what might be done to relieve industry If you want to relieve industry you have to begin at the base of industry, and the base of all industry is land. If you begin
by giving relief to that which is the base, you are bound to increase the difficulties from which we are suffering at the present time. Mr. F. D. Acland, who was formerly a Member of this House, said in a speech on the Agricultural Rents Bill in 1923:
I have never disguised the fact that I was going to support this Bill, partly because I was a landowner. I think that a great deal of the benefit will go immediately to the tenant, and ultimately will pass to the landlord."—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 11th July, 1923; col. 1522, Vol. 166.]
He was quite certain that while you may at the beginning give some small concession to a tenant, that concession ultimately passes to the landlord. We know that from sad experience. Side by side with the gifts from the Treasury there is the constant increase in the value of agricultural land because of transport developments, just as in cities land values are increased because of improvements made by the citizens' money. The taxation of motors and the maintenance of roads tend to increase the value of the land, and all this added value is giving increased power to the landlord, and inducing him to demand higher prices. Let me cite the case of the Holywell Rural District Council. It is not an exaggerated case, but a fair example. The Chairman of the Housing Committee, Mr. John Petrie, stated that in his area they had been asked to pay £150 for two acres and over £600 for one acre of land, and other landowners had refused to sell at all.

The CHAIRMAN: This Clause deals only with agricultural land.

Mr. HARDIE: It was agricultural land that these people wanted to propose for building purposes.

The CHAIRMAN: If the land has more than agricultural value, it does not come within the scope of the Clause.

Mr. HARDIE: We know that the Chancellor of the Exchequer, when he spoke on this subject, but not as a member of the Tory party, advocated the very reverse of what he is trying to do now. The Tory party promised to do something for industry. It is allowing a Chancellor of the Exchequer who has just come into the party to start on the course of giving advantages to men who have never by their own effort created any of the value that they enjoy. While
we have the unemployed man in the street, While hon. Members opposite claim to have the votes of working men, while they talk glibly on platforms of what they are going to do, and while they come here and joke during the day in order to push serious business on to the small hours of the night, we shall take care that the country realises the fraud the party has proved, because, while it has done nothing for the unemployed, it has put more into the hands of the landlord.

8.0 P.M.

Mr. LANSBURY: I do not intend to keep hon. Members who are waiting for their dinner very many minutes, but I think it desirable to say something on this surrender to the land-lords and to congratulate the right hon. baronet the Member for Wells (Sir E. Sanders) on his success in wheedling this concession out of the Chancellor and the Government. I do not think a real old-fashioned Tory Chancellor would have conceded it quite as easily as the right hon. Gentleman has done, but, as has been said many times, the right hon. Gentleman has to justify his position, and the pervert is always more zealous than one who has been a long time working for a particular cause. Although it is said this particular concession is a very little one, yet when we have asked for anything, whether large or small, we have always been told that the Budget is so nicely balanced that it must be taken as a whole and that no part of it must be altered. What the right hon. Gentleman and the Government are doing here is assisting those whose ancestors have been rooted on the necks of the British people for centuries, while they are neglecting a class of people on whom this £500,000 ought to be spent if the Government have it to spend. I refer to the people who die leaving very small properties, perhaps of £200 or £300. It is not a matter of the duty which they have to pay, but of the trouble and difficulty which they experience in putting through the necessary papers. There are thousands of poor people left with very small amounts who have this difficulty.

Mr. CHURCHILL: How much have they to pay?

Mr. LANSBURY: It is not a matter of how much they have to pay. Let the right
hon. Gentleman go and live in Epping Town which he represents and he will have a continual stream of people—at any rate, one or two every month—asking him to help in filling up papers and going through all the formalities of making returns necessary in connection with this small amount of duty. I admit it is small.

Mr. CHURCHILL: One per cent.

Mr. LANSBURY: If it is £1 out of £100 that is just as bad as £10 taken from a person who is getting £1,000. There are some people to whom £1,000 does not mean as much as £1 means to a poor widow. That is a point easily realised by anyone who has any relationship with poor people. I am against this proposal because it is another triumph for the Tory and Liberal landlords in this country, the worst vested interest—the most ancient anyhow—in the country. Where are you going to draw the line between agricultural land and land for building purposes? This point also can be demonstrated in the right hon. Gentleman's own constituency. On the new Southend road there has been a huge expenditure of public money, and I question if anyone in this Committee or any land valuer could assess the land values that have been created there or put a value on that land at the present moment. A man may die and leave a considerable quantity of land which in the ensuing year would appreciate in value in the same manner and yet the duties would only be paid on the agricultural value. No one would be able to say beforehand that a road of this kind was going to be built and it would not be treated as anything other than agricultural land.
I have in mind a landlord in the East End of London who paid Death Duties on a certain piece of land on the amount of £2,500. A little while later the land was wanted for building purposes and he asked the local authorities £6,500 for that piece of land. I think that is downright swindling and a robbery of the public. If any of us were to carry out such practices in private life we should be considered as thieves. I call that blackmailing the population, and I told the gentleman concerned, in writing, exactly what I thought of him. I never go behind people's backs to say what I think of them. I do not
see that in this proposal you are going to obviate that kind of thing. In these days agricultural values change into urban values very rapidly and without any effort on the part of the landlord. Someone may build a factory just after the death of a landlord or something of that nature may happen, and it may be that in the course of a year the people who have inherited land will have got out of even the paltry responsibility which they now have to bear. I think this is another proof that no matter who the workers send here the classes are able to hold their power over us. Here we have a handful of men representative of a small but very powerful community in our midst, and they are able, not by numbers, to gain

this concession. I believe that hon. Members opposite who represent industrial areas do not in their hearts agree with this proposal, but so powerful is the landed interest that it is able to take the Government by the throat and shake this concession out of them. This is another instance of helping to make England:
a paradise for the rich, a hell for the poor,
a quotation which the right hon. Gentleman will, no doubt, remember.

Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 256; Noes, 158.

Division No. 165.]
AYES.
[8.8 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cope, Major William
Harrison, G. J. C.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Couper, J. B.
Hartington, Marquess of


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Haslam, Henry C.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hawke, John Anthony


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Atkinson, C.
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Henn, Sir Sydney H.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Dalkeith, Earl of
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Dalziel, Sir Davison
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)


Bennett, A. J.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Berry, Sir George
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Betterton, Henry B.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Dixey, A. C.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Drewe, C.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Hume, Sir G. H.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Ellis, R. G.
Huntingfield, Lord


Brass, Captain W.
Elveden, Viscount
Hurst, Gerald B.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
England, Colonel A.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Briscoe, Richard George
Everard, W. Lindsay
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Jackson, Lieut.-Colonel Hon. F. S.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Jacob, A. E.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Fermoy, Lord
Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Fielden, E. B.
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Finburgh, S.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)


Bullock, Captain M.
Fleming, D. P.
Kindersley, Major Guy M.


Burman, J. B.
Ford, P. J.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lamb, J. Q.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fraser, Captain Ian
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Campbell, E. T.
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Little, Dr. E. Graham


Cassels, J. D.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gee, Captain R.
Loder, J. de V.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, S.)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Lumley, L. R.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Goff, Sir Park
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Chapman, Sir S.
Gower, Sir Robert
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Grace, John
Macintyre, Ian


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Macmillan, Captain H.


Christie, J. A.
Gretton, Colonel John
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Grotrian, H. Brent
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Clarry, Reginald George
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E. (Bristol, N.)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Clayton, G. C.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Margesson, Capt. D.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hammersley, S. S.
Merriman, F. B.


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hanbury, C.
Meyer, Sir Frank


Cooper, A. Duff
Harland, A.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Rentoul, G. S.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Moles, Thomas
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell-(Croyeton, S.)


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Tinne, J. A.


Moreing, Captain A. H.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Salmon, Major I.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Waddington, R.


Murchison C. K.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Nail Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Nelson Sir Frank
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Neville, R. J.
Sandon, Lord
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Watts, Dr. T.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)
Wells, S. R.


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)
Shepperson, E. W.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Oakley, T.
Skelton, A. N.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Penny, Frederick George
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Peto, Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Womersley, W. J.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Pielou, D. P.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Pilditch, Sir Philip
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Radford, E. A.
Storry Deans, R.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Ramsden, E.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Styles, Captain H. Walter



Rees, Sir Beddoe
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Commander B. Eyres Monsell and


Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Colonel Gibbs.


Remer, J. R.
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Groves, T.
Owen, Major G.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Grundy, T. W.
Palin, John Henry


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Paling, W.


Amman, Charles George
Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Ponsonby, Arthur


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bliston)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.


Baker, Walter
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hardie, George D.
Riley, Ben


Barr, J.
Harris, Percy A.
Ritson, J.


Batey, Joseph
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hayday, Arthur
Rose, Frank H.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hayes, John Henry
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Briant, Frank
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Broad, F. A.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Bromfield, William
Hirst, G. H.
Scum, John


Bromley, J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sexton, James


Buchanan, G.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Cape, Thomas
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Charleton, H. C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Clowes, S.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Slivertown)
Smillie, Robert


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Compton, Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Connolly, M.
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kennedy, T.
Snell, Harry


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kenyon, Barnet
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Spencer, George A. (Broxtowe)


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lansbury, George
Stamford, T. W.


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Duckworth, John
Lindley, F. W.
Sutton, J. E.


Duncan, C.
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Dunnico, H.
Lowth, T.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lunn, William
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Mackinder, W.
Thurtle, E.


Fenby, T. D.
MacLaren, Andrew
Tinker, John Joseph


Forrest, W.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


George, Rt. Hon. David Lloyd
March, S.
Varley, Frank B.


Gibbins, Joseph
Maxton, James
Viant, S. P.


Gillett, George M.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Gosling, Harry
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Montague, Frederick
Warne, G. H.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Morris, R. H.
Watson, W. M. (Dnnfermline)


Greenall, T.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Murnin, H.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Naylor, T. E.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Oliver, George Harold
Welsh, J. C.




Westwood, J.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)



Whiteley, W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. A. Barnes.


Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Windsor, Walter

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): The Amendment which I select is that standing in the name of the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George)—at the end of Subsection (1), to insert the words:
Provided that the estate, farm, houses, farm buildings, cottages, fences, drains, and other works have been maintained according to the standard imposed by the requirements of good husbandry.
I understand, however, that he does not wish to move it.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Clause be added to the Bill."

Mr. N. MACLEAN: Why are you passing over the Amendment standing in my name and in that of some of my colleagues—in Sub-section (1), to leave out the words "commencement of this Act," and to insert instead thereof the words, "thirty-first day of March, nineteen hundred and thirty"?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I did not select it.

Mr. MACLEAN: I think I am in order in saying, on the Question that the Clause be added to the Bill, what I would have said had I been able to move my Amendment. This proposal of the Government, coming as it has done at such a period, has come too suddenly upon the Government and upon this Committee for them to consider properly what ought to be done in the matter. Consequently, I put down an Amendment which had for its object the postponement of the operation of this proposal till 1930. I did so, because I was anxious that the Government should have an opportunity of studying the question in fairly decent calmness and with ample time to arrive at a conclusion as to whether or not this particular proposal would have the advantages which they have assured the Committee it was going to have. The purpose of the Clause is not to assist agriculture or any of the agricultural workers, but to assist a section of the landowning classes of this country. It is one of the purposes of this Government to give assistance only to their own particular friends. It has always been the record of a Tory Government to look after their friends well, both individually and
collectively, and in this Clause they are looking after a section of their friends who are interested in holding or owning land.
I have already suggested, and I repeat the suggestion, that it would be wiser for the Government to withdraw the proposition contained in this Clause and to abandon the concession which they are intending to make. Otherwise, it is making it possible for those of us who sit on these benches to use the action of the Government as conclusive proof of the things we have said outside in the country, that this Government is not a Government of the people of Great Britain, but a class Government, representing only a class, and a very small class, and that all the legislation which they will make an effort to carry through, the legislation which they have already carried, and the legislation which they may in the future attempt to put through, is legislation of a class character, intended only to benefit those who are immediately concerned with the class which the Government represent. In everything they intend to do, these things will always be attempted to be carried through with the idea that they are assisting, not all the people, but only a section, and I submit that it is time that a number of us abandoned what seem now to be futile attempts to shape legislation in this House and to put into Bills which the Government may bring in Clauses which we think might make some amelioration possible in the lot of the people whom we mainly represent. That is now futile, and all our efforts, on these benches, at any rate, ought to be directed towards drawing the attention of the people of this country to the pretence of the Government, to the mockery of the people outside, to the helping of their own friends in all things and towards obstructing, if possible, to the last possible hour and the last minute of the last possible hour, any legislation which this class Government bring into this House.

Question put, "That the Clause be added to the Bill."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 228; Noes, 153.

Division No. 166.]
AYES.
[8.25 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Ford, P. J.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Oakley, T.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Galbraith, J. F. W.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Oman, Sir Charles William C.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Gee, Captain R.
Penny, Frederick George


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Atkinson, C.
Goff, Sir Park
Pleiou, D. P.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gower, Sir Robert
Pilcher, G.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Grace, John
Pilditch, Sir Philip


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Radford, E. A.


Berry, Sir George
Guest, Capt. Rt. Hon. F. E.(Bristol, N.)
Ramsden, E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk Peel


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Hammersley, S. S.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hanbury, C.
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Harland, A.
Remer, J. R.


Brass, Captain W.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Rentoul, G. S.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hartington, Marquess of
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Haslam, Henry C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Briscoe, Richard George
Hawke, John Anthony
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Salmon, Major I.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Buckingham, Sir H.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Bullock, Captain M.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Sandon, Lord


Burman, J. B.
Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Campbell, E. T.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Cassels, J. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Skelton, A. N.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Chapman, Sir S.
Hume, Sir G. H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Huntingfield, Lord
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hurst, Gerald B.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Christie, J. A.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Jacob, A. E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Clarry, Reginald George
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Clayton, G. C.
Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Storry Deans, R.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Lamb, J. Q.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Cope, Major William
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Couper, J. B.
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Thompson, Luke (Sunderland)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn. N.)
Loder, J. de V.
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell-(Croydon, S.)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Tinne, J. A.


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lumley, L. R.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Waddington, R.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dalkeith, Earl of
Macintyre, Ian
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Off)


Dalziel, Sir Davison
Macmillan, Captain H.
Watts, Dr. T.


Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Wells, S. R.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
MacRobert, Alexander M.
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Dixey, A. C.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Drewe, C.
Merriman, F. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Eden, Captain Anthony
Meyer, Sir Frank
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Wise, Sir Fredric


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Womersley, W. J.


Ellis, R. G.
Moles, Thomas
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Elveden, Viscount
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W.R., Ripon)


England, Colonel A.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Everard, W. Lindsay
Murchison, C. K.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Fermoy, Lord
Nelson, Sir Frank



Finburgh, S.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fleming, D. P.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Colonel Gibbs and Major




Hennessy.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Ammon, Charles George
Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Attlee, Clement Richard
Barnes, A.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Barr, J.




Batey, Joseph
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Hayday, Arthur
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hayes, John Henry
Scrymgeour, E.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Briant, Frank
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sexton, James


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, G. H.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Bromfield, William
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Bromley, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Buchanan, G.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smillie, Robert


Clowes, S.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Slivertown)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Snell, Harry


Compton, Joseph
Kennedy, T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Connolly, M.
Kenyon, Barnet
Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lansbury, George
Stephen, Campbell


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James
Sutton, J. E.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Llndley, F. W.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Day, Colonel Harry
Livingstone, A. M.
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Duckworth, John
Lowth, T.
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Duncan, C.
Lunn, William
Thurtle, E.


Dunnico, H.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Tinker, John Joseph


Edwards, C (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Mackinder, W.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
MacLaren, Andrew
Varley, Frank B.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Viant, S. P.


Fenby, T. D.
March, S.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Forrest, W.
Maxton, James
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Gibbins, Joseph
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gillett, George M.
Montague, Frederick
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gosling, Harry
Morris, R. H.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Murnin, H.
Welsh, J. C.


Greenall, T.
Naylor, T. E.
Westwood, J.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Oliver, George Harold
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Owen, Major G.
Whiteley, W.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Palin, John Henry
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Grundy, T. W.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Potts, John S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvli)
Riley, Ben
Windsor, Walter


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Ritson, J.
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Hardie, George D.
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)



Harris, Percy A.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Rose, Frank H.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Reductions in respect of widowed mothers.)

Section twenty of the Finance Act, 1920 (in so far as it provides for deductions from assessable income in respect of widowed mothers), as amended by Section twenty-one of the Finance Act, 1924, shall have effect as if for the words "sixty pounds "there were substituted the words "eighty pounds."—[Major Crawfurd.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Major CRAWFURD: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
In order to keep to the spirit of the agreement which has been made, I shall be very brief. The Clause, in a word, proposes to extend from £60 to £80 the deduction for the purpose of assessing income in respect of widowed mothers. The right hon. Gentleman and his colleagues have both, at different times this afternoon, explained our system of taxation. Already it is characterised by
large exceptions, both in the case of classes and in the case of individuals, and I submit there could be no better case for extending that principle than the one which I am now proposing. I realise, of course, that there is a very ready answer to me or to any other hon. Member upon this side of the House who proposes such a Clause. The ready answer is that, on a previous occasion last year, a similar Clause was voted against by both the Labour party and the Liberal party. But one cannot help remembering that on that occasion last year the Finance Bill provided for very large remissions of taxation which would, at any rate, go a long way towards helping the class of people on whose behalf this new Clause is now being moved. Therefore I think that the argument used against this Clause loses its validity. This particular Clause has been drawn, not as a demon-
stration—because, if that had been the object, we could very simply have increased the figure largely—but with the express purpose of making it acceptable to the Government. Although it would ill become any hon. Member of this House to indulge in threats, I might draw the attention of the right hon. Gentleman the Financial Secretary to the fact that the diminishing majority of his Government—as shown in the last few Divisions—makes it important, I think, that there should be some concession to the opinion expressed on this side of the Committee.
During the course of the Budget Debates the colleague of the right hon. Gentleman the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and particularly this afternoon, has been subjected to a certain degree of criticism directed to the particular method which he has chosen to distribute the bounty that has arisen out of the surplus. We already have had a very large expansion of what on a previous occasion I ventured to call a new form of the dole system. There have been unexpected doles to manufacturers this afternoon, and in the early hours of yesterday morning we had a new proposal for doles to landlords. I do suggest that the right hon. Gentleman and his colleague might do something to limit their growing unpopularity by paying a little attention to a class of people struggling and very largely helpless. There is some danger of the colleague of the right hon. Gentleman—not so much himself—being drowned in a sea of obloquy. What I am doing at the moment is to throw him out a life-line.
The proposal that is contained in this Clause will have such a small effect on the revenue on the Exchequer that it cannot disturb seriously even the very delicately balanced poise of the financial edifice built up in the last three weeks. The appeal that I have made, roughly, here is for a class of people who, perhaps, above all others, are entitled to and need the alleviation and help. The request that we are making is a very modest and a very humane one, and one which could be accepted quite easily by the Government without disturbing the balance of the Budget. If they accept it, it will redound to their credit and will go a long way towards supplying them and
their supporters in the country with material to answer the criticisms which which have been levelled at them from these benches this afternoon.

Mr. TREVELYAN THOMSON: In supporting very briefly the new Clause put forward by my hon. and gallant Friend I do so because I feel sure that the class for whom we speak appeals to the sympathies of all Members. On a previous occasion when the matter was before the House a concession was made, and I trust that, having begun, it will be followed this year by a further concession, so that real justice may be done to a class who are more deserving probably than any other in the country. Consider the case of the widowed mother with a family to bring up. Surely there is no better case in which some concession might be made. The total amount involved will not be large, and will not upset the balance of the Budget, about which we have heard. Earlier this afternoon the Chancellor of the Exchequer was able to deplete that balance by £500,000. If that is not going to upset the finance of his Budget, then I am sure this small concession for which we ask will not militate against the financial stability of his proposals. There is so little done directly for those who are in greatest need. The indirect taxpayer gets very little assistance. On the other hand, the Super-tax payer gets considerable largesse, and concessions have been made to landlords and others. Surely, in view of that liberal distribution to those who have, some small concession might be made to those who have not? When the breadwinner has been taken away, the widow is at a very great disadvantage, and it does not seem right, in view of the fact that she often has to bring up a family, that the second partner in the household should be less regarded than the wife from a concession point of view. The married man and his wife rank at £225, whereas the single man only gets £180. We are asking for this £80. We are quite satisfied that the Government in their reply will express their sympathy with our claim. I hope, however, that that sympathy will be translated into something more tangible in view of the concession made to the Super-tax payers and the landlord class. I trust that this evening we may have some concession made to those whose needs are great.

Mr. GUINNESS: The lesson, I think, to be learned from the remarks that have just been made is, that those who support the Government are bound to show a greater responsibility in these matters than those who are in the position of critics. Of course, all our sympathies are engaged in an Amendment of this kind. The trouble, however, is that it is not really a balancing of the Budget, but a balancing of one claim as between another. These varying claims, put forward on behalf of various classes of taxpayers, for which we must all feel great sympathy and respect, were examined into by the Royal Commission on Income Tax. They did not see fit to recommend any increase in the allowance of the amount for the widowed mother, which then stood at £45. Since then an increase has taken place to £60, but that increase was made in definite relation to another class of dependents' claims, namely, the widowers' housekeepers. These two classes have always been dealt with on the same footing, the widower with a housekeeper and the man with a widowed mother, and I would urge upon the Committee the danger of upsetting the balance in these claims. It is so easy for any of us to raise sympathy by stressing the needs of one particular class, but that is not the way to get a reasonable adjustment between varying claims, and the Government have felt that the relief which it has been possible to give to the small Income Tax payer should be distributed over the widest possible area. We have accepted that view in the remissions we have made, and we do not think it is possible to single out one of these many other claims for preferential treatment.

Mr. WALLHEAD: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what, in the opinion of the Treasury, the remission which is now asked for would actually cost?

Mr. GUINNESS: I think this remission, if it stood alone, would cost about £30,000, but it could not stand alone; it must be related to other claims. It would have to be related to the case of the widower with a housekeeper, where though I have not got the exact figure, the remission would be more costly. We

feel that these remissions must be kept in the same relation as was laid down by the Royal Commission.

Mr. WALLHEAD: I should like to observe that we have just voted £500,000 to the landlord class of the country, and now the hon. Gentleman refuses this slight remission, which he admits would cost only £30,000. This is an indication of the tenour and the tone of the whole Budget.

Mr. GUINNESS: May I remind the hon. Member that we have not voted any remission of taxation; we have merely voted for the retention of the existing scale in that case; whereas, for the class of taxpayers to whom the hon. Member is evidently referring, we have made a very large remission of taxation, over £7,000,000.

Mr. WALLHEAD: What I wanted to point out was, that we are saving £500,000 on taxation proposals as originally submitted to the House, and that there is a distinct difference between the treatment of this fortunate class and these unfortunate widows, and to say that that is indicative of the whole tenour of the Budget, and that I raise my voice in protest against it.

Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee proceeded to a Division.

Mr. R. MORRISON (seated and covered): On a point of Order, Captain FitzRoy. I wish to ask whether the Division, which has just taken place, has been taken in a regular fashion, inasmuch, as you announced the hon. and gallant Member for Montrose (Sir Robert Hutchison) as one of the Tellers for the Ayes, whereas there appears in the hon. and gallant Member's place as a Teller the hon. Member for West Middlesbrough (Mr. T. Thomson)?

The DEPUTY - CHAIRMAN: Unfortunately, the hon. and gallant Member whom I originally nominated was not present, and I nominated another Teller at the time.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 154; Noes, 232.

Division No. 167.]
AYES.
[8.30 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Ammon, Charles George
Barker. G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)


Adamson, w. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Attlee, Clement Richard
Barnes, A.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Barr, J.


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scrymgeour, E.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sexton, James


Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Bromfield, William
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Bromley, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sitch, Charles H.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Clowes, S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Slivertown)
Smillie, Robert


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Smith, H. B. Lees (Keighley)


Compton, Joseph
Kennedy, T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Connolly, M.
Kenyon, Barnet
Snell, Harry


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kirkwood, D.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lansbury, George
Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James
Stamford, T. W.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lindley, F. W.
Stephen, Campbell


Day, Colonel Harry
Livingstone, A. M.
Sutton, J. E.


Duckworth, John
Lowth, T.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Duncan, C.
Lunn, William
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dunnico, H.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Thurtle, E.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Mackinder, W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
MacLaren, Andrew
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


England, Colonel A.
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Varley, Frank B.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
March, S.
Viant, S. P.


Fenby, T. D.
Maxton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Forrest, W.
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Gibbins, Joseph
Mond, Rt. Ron. Sir Alfred
Warne, G. H.


Gillett, George M.
Montague, Frederick
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gosling, Harry
Morris, R. H.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Murnin, H.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Josiah


Greenall, T.
Naylor, T. E.
Welsh, J. C.


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Oliver, George Harold
Westwood J.


Grenfell, D. H. (Glamorgan)
Owen, Major G.
Whiteley, W.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Palin, John Henry
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Groves, T.
Paling, W.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grundy, T. W.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Pethick-Lawrence, F W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Potts, John S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Windsor, Walter


Hardie, George D.
Riley, Ben
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Harris, Percy A.
Ritson, J.



Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hastings, Sir Patrick
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Sir Godfrey Collins and Mr. Trevelyan Thomson.


Hayday, Arthur
Rose, Frank H.



Hayes, John Henry
Saklatvala, Shapurji



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Burman, J. B.
Davidson, Major-General Sir John H.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Campbell, E. T.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Cassels, J. D.
Dixey, A. C.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Drewe, C.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Eden, Captain Anthony


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Chapman, Sir S.
Edmondson, Major A. J.


Atkinson, C.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Chilcott, Sir Warden
Ellis, R. G.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Christie, J. A.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Everard, W. Lindsay


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Clarry, Reginald George
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.


Berry, Sir George
Clayton, G. C.
Fermoy, Lord


Betterton, Henry B.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Finburgh, S.


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Fleming, D. P.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Ford, P. J.


Blades, Sir George Rowland
Conway, Sir W. Martin
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cope, Major William
Fraser, Captain Ian


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Couper, J. B.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Brass, Captain W.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Ganzoni, Sir John


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islingtn. N.)
Gee, Captain R.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Briscoe, Richard George
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Brittain, Sir Harry
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Goff, Sir Park


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Curtis-Bennett, Sir Henry
Gower, Sir Robert


Buckingham, Sir H.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Grace, John


Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Dalkeith, Earl of
Greene, W. P. Crawford


Bullock, Captain M.
Dalziel, Sir Davison
Grotrian, H. Brent




Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Macmillan Captain H.
Sandon, Lord


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Hammersley, S. S.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Shaw, Lt. Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Hanbury, C.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wlits, Westb'y)


Harland, A.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Shepperson, E. W.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Margesson, Captain D.
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Hartington, Marquess of
Merriman, F. B.
Skelton, A. N.


Haslam, Henry C.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Hawke, John Anthony
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Moles, Thomas
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
Storry, Deans, R.


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arther Clive
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Murchison, C. K.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Holland, Sir Arthur
Nelson, Sir Frank
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell-(Croydon, S.)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Tinne, J. A.


Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Oakley, T.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Hume, Sir G. H.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Huntingfield, Lord
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Waddington, R.


Hurst, Gerald B.
Penny, Frederick George
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Pleiou, D. P.
Watts, Dr. T.


Jacob, A. E.
Pilcher, G.
Wells, S. R.


Jones, G. W. H. (Stoke Newington)
Pilditch, Sir Philip
White, Lieut.-Colonel Q. Dairymple


Kennedy, A. R. (Preston).
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Kidd, J. (Linlithgow)
Radford, E. A.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Ramsden, E.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lamb, J. Q.
Rawson, Alfred Cooper
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Little, Dr. E. Graham
Reid, D. D. (County Down)
Womersley, W. J.


Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Remer, J. R.
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W.R., Ripon)


Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Rentoul, G. S.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Loder, J. de V.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Lumley, L. R.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Salmon, Major I.



Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Captain Douglas Hacking and


McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Lord Stanley.


Macintyre, Ian
Sanders, Sir Robert A.

Mr. MORRISON: May I ask you, Mr. Deputy-Chairman, whether your announcement about the change in the Tellers was made to the Committee, and whether there were any hon. Members present when you made the announcement?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I made it to the Committee, and there were a number of hon. Members present.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Exemption of agricultural shows from entertainments duly in certain cases.)

The Entertainments Duty imposed by the Finance (New Duties) Act, 1916, as amended by any subsequent enactment, shall not, after the first day of July, nineteen hundred and twenty-five, be charged on payments for admission to any agricultural show the whole of the profits of which are devoted to agricultural or educational purposes, notwithstanding that admission to the show may include admission to entertainments in regard to which, but for the provisions of this Section, Entertainments
Duty would be payable.—[Sir Robert Hamilton.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
I will put my points as briefly as I possibly can, because this matter has already been brought before the House on one or two previous occasions. I am glad that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is present, because he expressed great sympathy last year with the object of this proposal, and I hope that sympathy will now enable him to give us his support. I think we are all agreed that entertainment taxes are bad, and they are particularly bad when they fall upon entertainments which are held with the object of improving agriculture. I am sure if this question could be left to the free vote of the Committee there is very little doubt that this tax on agricultural shows would be wiped out at once.
Everybody is in favour of the idea contained in this Clause, and I do not think anyone is against it in principle. I think we are all agreed that the original intention of this tax was not to tax agricultural shows, but it has been found that the tax was drawn too narrowly, and already we have had two concessions. A slight concession was made in 1923 whereby a society might exhibit products belonging to an industry other than that for which the society existed. Again, in 1924 a further concession was made whereby the exhibits in an agricultural exhibition outside the specified object of the society might be introduced without disqualifying the show for exemption to the Entertainments Duty, and displays of skill in the industry in which the society was interested were allowed without running the society any risk as to the tax. These concessions have gone a considerable way towards relieving this grievance, but there is still left a little distance to go in order to relieve agricultural shows entirely of this tax. I am asking the Government tonight to see if they cannot go the whole way, as there is only a little distance left for them to go, and exempt agricultural shows altogether from the Entertainments Duty. Although there is only a very little distance to go it is nevertheless a very important matter to small and struggling country agricultural societies.
We all know that in the smallest and poorest districts of the country there are these local societies which do all they can to improve agriculture in their area, and we ought to give them every assistance we possibly can. The assistance that can be given by removing this tax from them, although the amount is very small, means a very great deal to these poor and struggling societies. As the Financial Secretary well knows, the society must depend on its "gate" at the annual show. The annual show in a country district is in the nature of a sort of fete to which the whole countryside looks forward. Everyone goes to it, men, women and children, it is discussed long beforehand, and the greatest interest is taken in the competitions between the various products and exhibits. It is not enough, however, simply to go and look at the animals, or the cheeses, or the
machinery. That makes rather a dull day for an annual fete, and it is only sensible and necessary to have something in the nature of side shows or some little extra items which will break up what may be monotonous to that section of people who go to the show but are not, perhaps, particularly and directly interested in agriculture. In my part of the country we usually have foot races, and possibly pony races. If we have races for prizes, that brings us within the law and we have to pay the Entertainments Duty.
Little things like this, which are only put there to brighten the day, to add interest to the show and to improve the "gate," ought not by any manner of means to be allowed to bring what is really an agricultural show within the ambit of this tax. I think the cost would be very small, and I should like to hear from the Financial Secretary if he can tell us what the actual cost would be of making this remission so that agricultural shows should be entirely free from the tax. The Committee has just recently agreed to £500,000 going to the landlords, and I heard the argument put forward that that would help agriculture. I must say I was a little at a loss to know how it would help agriculture, but the £5,000 or £10,000 or even £50,000 which would more than amply cover what I am now asking, would do a great deal to help these agricultural societies. The form of words that I propose may not be that which is most desirable, but it covers clearly enough the idea of the Clause, and, if the Government are sympathetic to the idea, I am sure they are perfectly competent to clothe that idea in suitable words.

Mr. GUINNESS: This is an old controversy. As the hon. Member has reminded us, it was discussed last year, and on that occasion many of us who now sit on this side of the House took part in bringing about a considerable extension of the possibilities of entertainment which were thrown open to the promoters of agricultural shows. It is because I was satisfied with that compromise, which was arrived at as a result of consultations last year, that I cannot agree with the far wider and, as I consider, dangerous proposals from the point of view of the Entertainments Duty as a whole, which the hon. Member has now put forward. The compromise last year was that the show
must be provided by a society not established for profit, and must consist solely, apart from a band, music, or exhibition, of work or displays of skill by children, the products of the industry and materials, etc., used in their production, or displays of skill by workers in the industry. That was a very great widening of the powers for providing entertainments to attract the public to go to agricultural shows. I agree with the hon. Member that it is bad that the Entertainments Duty should fall upon what are not entertainments, but shows where entertainments are not the prime object. I think that that is a paraphrase of what he said at the beginning of his speech. I do not think, however, that the Entertainments Duty does fall now upon those shows where entertainments are not a first object.

Sir R. HAMILTON: I hope the right hon. Gentleman will excuse my interrupting him, but is it not a fact that, if prizes are given for a race at an agricultural show, that would bring it within the Entertainments Duty?

Mr. GUINNESS: Yes, that is so, but obviously, if you do not charge Entertainments Duty on races of that kind, you could not possibly keep the existing very remunerative source of Entertainments Duty in connection with horse races. It would be very invidious and unfair to discriminate.

Sir R. HAMILTON: As a matter of fact I meant a foot race. I was not thinking about horse races.

Mr. GUINNESS: The point about horse racing has been brought forward, and, as a matter of fact, it has been contended that horse races ought to be allowed to be free from the duty. Of course you cannot tax the ordinary horse race if you allow these features to take place at agricultural shows. Side shows are now allowed provided that a separate admission fee is charged, and other non-dutiable entertainments and attractions, such as dancing and so forth, where people entertain themselves, are a sufficient inducement to people to attend these fixtures under the present law. The chief difficulty of the hon. Member's proposal is that it would throw open a very wide door to unfair competition with dutiable entertainments. He provides no definition of what an agricultural show is. It would only be
necessary, apparently, to have a cow and a plough, and then almost any entertainment might be covered by this proposed exemption. It is true that under the Clause the receipts must not go to private profit, but there is nothing to prevent the promoter of a show such as it is proposed to exempt from diverting large funds to private profit under the guise of expenses.

Sir R. HAMILTON: It is an agricultural society.

Mr. GUINNESS: Yes, but they could have a contractor to provide entertainments of a character which would almost certainly be dutiable and in competition with dutiable entertainments, which might absorb practically the whole of the payments for admission to the show in private profit. I am sorry that for these reasons the Clause which the hon. Member has brought forward—

Mr. KIRKWOOD: You are not making a good joke!

Mr. GUINNESS: I intend it in all seriousness. It would be disastrous to the whole fabric of the Entertainments Duty if we allowed such a wide exemption, and if we allowed this unfair discrimination in favour of one form of entertainment, I believe it would be absolutely impossible for us to retain the duty at all. I am sorry, therefore, that I cannot accept the Clause.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I think I never heard a more laboured, a more futile or a weaker defence of a tax than we have just heard. The right hon. Gentleman has not even told us what amount of revenue would be lost to the Exchequer if this remission were granted. Whether or not he has an estimate in his papers I cannot say, but he never proferred one to the Committee. Would it be £5,000, £10,000, £15,000 or £20,000 per annum? No one knows.

Mr. GUINNESS: No one knows. That is why we cannot give an estimate. How can we tell how much revenue would be diverted from dutiable entertainments by this new and wide advantage given to agricultural shows?

Mr. JOHNSTON: If the right hon. Gentleman is unable to give us even an estimate of what the Treasury would lose by granting such a remission he has no
right whatever to say it would be a considerable sum.

Mr. GUINNESS: I did not say it would be a considerable sum. I said it would shatter the whole basis of the duty and make it impossible, in common fairness to those who are promoting entertainments subject to duty, to maintain the present system.

Mr. JOHNSTON: If to-morrow the right hon. Gentleman looks at the OFFICIAL REPORT and reads his speech, if he ever does anything of the kind the next morning, I think he will discover that the impression he left on the Committee—I do not remember the exact words—was that the remission of this duty would mean a considerable loss of public money to the Treasury. He admits he has no idea of what the money loss would be. I think he excelled himself when he imagined local cattle show societies leasing themselves out to private contractors. If it really was a joke, what kind of country has he been living in? I will speak of the country I know best. You have an annual show. All the farmers over a wide area form themselves into a society for this purpose. They go round with the hat and gather a little money for prizes and so on, and it is the only attempt that is being made by anyone to stimulate enterprise and cleanliness in agriculture. It is the only attempt that is being made anywhere or by anyone to bring agriculture up to a higher level than it is to-day. It is a small request that you should do something to brighten these cattle shows, to attract larger numbers of people, that you should allow races, that you should allows shows of one kind or another, that you should do everything you can to give agriculture a chance. If you will do everything you can to give agriculture a chance, as apart from finding subsidies for landlords, here is an opportunity of doing something. There is no political advantage in this for anyone. The class of people who very largely go to these shows vote for the right hon. Gentleman and his supporters. That shows their great need for education in other things. Nevertheless, they do it.
What some of us are really concerned about, apart from politics altogether, is the re-creation of our countryside, the
repatriation of our people, and when you come along with a miserable little proposal like this, to ask for a remission of a few pounds, the right hon. Gentleman cannot tell us what it will cost, and tells us some cock-and-bull story about agricultural societies hiring out their entertainments to a private contractor. If the farmers all over the country could get to know that this is the kind of thing their champions say about them, if the farmers get to know that this is how they are regarded when it comes down to brass tacks in the House of Commons, the Debate will have done a great deal to further agricultural education in an economic, political and social direction. Unless the right hon. Gentleman can say this remission would mean such a serious financial loss to the Treasury that he will probably require to put a little more on. fabric gloves or the Silk Taxes in order to square it, and that the whole Budget would go to ruin if people could get into agricultural shows without having to pay an Entertainment Tax, I trust the representatives of agricultural constituencies in every part of the Committee will defy the Whips for once and induce a glimmer of sanity on the Treasury in these matters

Mr. MORRIS: I hope there is still time for the Financial Secretary to the Treasury to have a discussion with the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bury St. Edmunds. The right hon. Gentleman, in opposition and in office, rather speaks with two voices on this question. Last year he was pressing on the Government the desirability of abolishing the Entertainments Duty. He deplored the necessity for going to the Treasury to ask for concessions, and said that was not a proper procedure. The Treasury after all had only to administer the law. He was in favour of a modification of it. Even to-day the approach has to be made. I hope he is still of the same opinion, that what we want is a further modification. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will leave it to a free vote of his party. The Solicitor-General might be able to inform the right hon. Gentleman of the views he expressed last year when a large number of hon. Members on that side were desirous of doing something in favour of agriculture. I hope that a large number of those who were last year in favour of this will not have changed their minds, and I hope
that they will be found in the Division Lobby supporting this new Clause. But I still hope that it will be possible for the right hon. Gentleman to change his mind. I hope that he is going to revert to his previous position, because here is a very small opportunity of doing something to encourage agriculture. What logical argument can there be, for instance, in exempting shows where there are races between children of a certain age but if the race happens to be between boys and girls of another age it becomes liable to the tax. There is no logical argument for a position of that kind and it is indefensible on every ground. I was equally astonished to hear the right hon. Gentleman say that he was not in a position to say what the tax brought in. Surely the Treasury must know what the figure is.

Mr. GUINNESS: It is because these agricultural shows do not pay the tax.

Mr. MORRIS: If these shows do not pay the tax now, then it would be very easy for the Treasury to make the concession, because it cannot bring them in any money now. The shows might be attended by a much greater number of people than at present and any additional profit might be devoted to the encouragement either of stock breeding or other similar purposes. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider this.

Mr. MARCH: As one of the members who was in the House last year, I am extremely surprised to see how quiet those people who advocate agriculture are keeping. I remember when the Labour Government was in office there was no less than eight of the representatives of agriculture on their feet at one time, all wanting to have a bite at the Treasury in regard to these agricultural shows. I daresay some of the members will think it rather strange that a London representative should be advocating the abolition of the Entertainments Duty in the case of agriculture shows. May I tell hon. Members that, fortunately or unfortunately, I happen to be a lad from the country, and I know something about what the people think of agricultural shows. I know they think about it for months before it takes place, and they make the necessary arrangements to try
and entertain the people in the villages who do not get any other entertainment all the year round. I daresay some of the agriculturists who are real agricultural representatives would understand that, because there are many villages in the rural areas where they do not have even a penny cinema to go to without going miles for it, and when they do organise an agricultural show they do anticipate they are going to get the support of the men in the villages surrounding it, and it would not be very attractive for them only just to see the cattle, and the produce that there are at the show, and they certainly want a side-show or a little entertainment. It is not very much without them, and they have to pay to come in. If they can get a band to come any distance for nothing, they are very lucky. There are not very many men round the country villages who are able to lose their day's work to go and play for the amusement of other people for nothing. I am talking about the money they have to pay for the bands to go and play.
I also remember last year the right hon. Member himself being very anxious that the Entertainments Duty should be taken off altogether for agricultural shows. He is on the other side of the House now, therefore he alters his mind. This tax would be infinitesimal to the Treasury, but it would be a great boon to the people in our agricultural districts, and it would be beneficial to some of them not to have to pay quite so much to go into the shows. If it is only a penny or twopence out of the paltry and meagre amounts which they get as wages it certainly would be a help. Hon. Members have not yet come to the conclusion that agricultural workers are entitled to a living wage, because they do not get it, and therefore every penny that they have to pay in this direction is very obnoxious to them. I certainly think that this little concession this year ought to be given willingly and freely by a Government which is always supposed to be on its hind legs doing something for agriculture.

Sir A. SINCLAIR: I only want to add a few words to what has already been said by my hon. Friends. I do repeat that here is an instance where we have
really a strong case for a concession which after all will cost the right hon. Gentleman nothing—that is the first big point—because nothing is being paid at the present time. The only possible effect it might have on the Treasury would be that there are rather prosperous societies in the richer districts in England and parts of the South of Scotland which might conceivably earn profits on which they would be liable to Income Tax and the Treasury might actually gain. They could not possibly lose, though in the part of the country where I come from that argument does not apply. These shows are the foci of the agricultural life of the locality, and the people come to these shows—farm servants, smallholders and large farmers—all the representatives of agriculture in the locality and it is extremely useful socially and as an educational institution. It is a thing which deserves to be encouraged in every way, and this tax keeps it back, especially in the part of the country I represent, where distances are so great and where it is a really great effort for the people to get to the place where the show is held. We want the women, the children and everybody to go. It really does make it very difficult if the mere fact of having some sports or a band makes the whole difference of a substantial addition to price which has to be paid for admission. Therefore, I do ask the right hon. Gentleman between now and the Report stage—I do not ask him to give a decision now—to give consideration to this very reasonable request which would be a stimulus to the agricultural life in the country districts and cost the Treasury no money at all.

Mr. LAMB: I wish to say—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] I suppose those cheers from hon. Members opposite mean that hon. Members think I shall support the new Clause. If so, hon. Members opposite will be disappointed, because I am not going to support the new Clause, and I will give my reason. I have made requests to the Chancellor of the Exchequer on previous occasions for concessions to agricultural shows, but whenever I have done so, or whenever others on this side have done so, we have specified the purpose for which we were making the request. I am glad to say that the requests have been granted
in the past, much to the advantage of agriculture. This new Clause does not specify a purpose. It says:
notwithstanding that admission to the show may include admission to entertainments in regard to which, but for the provisions of this Section, Entertainments Duty would be payable.
That shows that it is trying to attempt something which would come into competition with other shows which are liable to the Entertainments Duty.

Sir R. HAMILTON: The hon. Member will see that the money must be spent on agricultural or educational purposes.

Mr. LAMB: I am not dealing with that point. I am not dealing with the distribution of the money when it has been obtained, but with the morality of obtaining it under the circumstances which this Clause seeks. It is clear that if it were not for this Clause such an entertainment as is contemplated would be liable to duty. That would mean inequality between the treatment of the show and other shows, perhaps of a purely sporting or entertainment character. That being so, it would create injustice, and I am entirely opposed to trying to obtain something in this way. If hon. Members opposite want to abolish the tax altogether, let them say so, and we can have a straight vote upon it, but do not try to do it under the guise of doing something for agriculture. It is not fair. If hon. Members want anything to be done for the agricultural shows, let them say what it is that they want to do, and let us have a vote upon that. Do not make an unspecified request which would give an opportunity of doing something which would come into competition with those shows or exhibitions which have to pay the tax, and doing that under the guise of benefiting agriculture.

Mr. SEXTON: I would not have intervened had it not been for the absurd objection just taken from the other side. It is absurd to say that this would compete with other forms of amusement in the district. Everybody knows that the length of time of an agricultural show is limited to a few days. Therefore, the suggestion that what would be done at these shows would compete with
amusement places in the locality cannot hold water at all. These agricultural shows are here to-day and gone to-morrow. If the case against the Clause rests upon such an argument as has been advanced from the other side, then there is no case at all, and they ought to support the new Clause.

Mr. WESTWOOD: I would not have intervened but for the objection that has been raised from the other side. I represent a constituency in which there is one of the finest agricultural shows in the South of Scotland. Many of those who come to that particular agricultural show have to travel from 17 to 20 miles to the show and from 17 to 20 miles home again. The argument that the entertainment given at such a show would compete with entertainments held in the district is absurd. There can be no such competition. The agricultural show is only held once in the year. Surely our opponents on the other side will not attempt to deny the little side shows as far as the agricultural shows are concerned for the entertainment of those who live in our outlying districts, many miles from the ordinary usages of life which we have in the towns and cities, and who desire a little entertainment when the agricultural show is being held. There can be no competition as far as ordinary sports are concerned, because the Clause makes it quite clear that it can only be shows held for agricultural or educational purposes. This is the only plea put up during the whole of this Budget for a concession for education. There have been concessions to the landlords, concessions to the wearers of silk stockings, and now I ask for a concession for education.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: The hon. Member says that there is no provision in the Budget for education. I think he has forgotten that there is a provision which is going to do a great deal for education, and that is the Teachers Superannuation Bill.

Mr. WESTWOOD: That is not in the Budget.

Mr. SOMERVILLE: The provision is made in the Budget.

Mr. FENBY: As a member of an agricultural society interested in agricul-
tural shows, I wish to support this Clause. There is a good deal in the arguments that have been used in favour of the Clause. I am afraid that the right hon. Gentleman is making a certain prophecy, which I ventured to put before agricultural societies, come true. I suggested that I would not trust the Government, because the Government on agriculture was as fickle as the weather. It may be that a large agricultural society is able to exist without the sports element at its annual show, but there are the smaller societies, which are supported by the smallholder and by the labourer, which have to exist without the large contributions of the wealthy towards the show fund. It is in that direction that I think the Government ought to assist the smaller men. There are educational objects served at these shows. There are the cottagers' class, a class for the housewife, a class for the schoolchildren, and so on. There might be horse races and entertainments of that kind, which ought to pay the tax. I suggest that exception might be made in the case of the societies for which we are pleading.
You cannot expect that the small agricultural show for which I am pleading can have anything like they have at Ascot, with their great vested interests behind them. You do not get the vested interests that are suggested in a village show, but in order that ends may meet, and that the Government may get Income Tax out of the profits which they make, they should make this very small concession, because if you are going to rely on the farmer to support financially the small agricultural shows, unfortunately again by the action of the Government, which poses as the friend of the landlord and of the agriculturist in general, with the duty of 33⅓ per cent. on phosphates which is foreshadowed, the farmer will be in a worse position than ever to contribute anything to agricultural shows. As a farmer said to me the other day, "If that duty is put on it will cost me £20 a year increase." [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] The farmer will thus have less to give to agricultural shows. That is a sore point with hon. Members opposite.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I would not have intervened in this Debate but for the speeches delivered from the other side, especially the replies from the Government Bench. I am astonished at the
attitude of the Financial Secretary to the Treasury, who worried the Labour Government when they were in office on this very point on behalf of the agricultural labourers. I can well remember—and that is why I pulled him up when he was speaking—how eloquent he waxed in reference to the agricultural labourer being denied all social intercourse, and explaining that these shows were the only means whereby these people could meet together, and that they enabled friends to meet who could not otherwise get in touch with one another. Here he has an opportunity of doing what he asked should be done. He has been appealed to from every section of the House except the Tories. For the life of me I cannot see how the Tories will be able to go into the rural districts and justify the part which they are playing here tonight. The rural districts are the backbone of the Tory party in this country. Had it not been for the rural districts in the South of England the Conservative party would have been wiped out long ago, and yet that party are turning down the very people who have stood by them through thick and thin and on whom they have to depend in the last resort. The folk in the rural districts, both in England and Scotland, and even in Wales, are naurally Conservatives, and here are the Conservative party turning them down or depriving them of an opportunity of coming together by putting on this tax.
We have drawn attention to the fact that the great and wealthy at Ascot have not to pay this Entertainment Duty. The poor agricultural labourers have to pay a tax on their entertainments while the great and wealthy can go to Ascot and flaunt all their luxury before the unemployed in this country. The Minister in charge should direct his attention to this instead of engaging in a general conversation. This is a matter of grave importance. I cannot speak for the rural districts of England, but I certainly can speak with some authority of the rural districts in Scotland, where those people, as was stated by the hon. Member for Peebleshire (Mr. Westwood) hold the shows only once a year. Those agricultural societies hold those games. In Scotland they are designated the Highland games or the Highland shows. In Glasgow this year we have what is known
as the Highland show, which is really an agricultural show. There the people come, particularly the country people who never see one another from one year's end to another. [Laughter.] A fool laughs at his own folly. Although you may be knights of the realm, that does not make any difference. I am stating in plain English—[Laughter]—I am perfectly satisfied that I am speaking better English than the average individual who is laughing. As I have stated time and again, I speak the language of the race that stood between you and the onrushing Germans advancing to Paris, and I speak a language and with a tongue that is not at this time of the night interfered with by any kind of liquor.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member should confine his remarks to the Entertainments Duty on agricultural shows.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I would not have digressed in any sense from the point under discussion had you been as strict with my opponents as you have been at the moment with me. [HON. MEMBERS: "Order!"] You can "Order" away, I am speaking about our Highland show. I was making an appeal on behalf of our agricultural workers. In Scotland we do not speak of them as agricultural labourers. We speak of them in a more humane way by calling them country servants. These men and women have to work on the farms that are spread all over the country, miles apart from one another. If hon. Members would read Burns's "Cotter's Saturday Night" they would learn something about the people whom both Labour and Liberal Members are asking the Government to assist. These people have no cinemas, no theatres, no Ascots. They are poor people. Even the farmer is invariably a very poor man. These people work from early morn to dewy eve, and they work seven days a week. The agricultural show is the one bright spot in their lives, unless they find another bright spot when they go to the kirk on Sundays.
I am not in the habit of appealing for concessions, and I do not get very many, but I appeal now on behalf of the Scottish agricultural worker, the peasantry of my native land. There is no denying the fact that the Scottish peasants have been driven out of their native land by
tens of thousands. Instead of getting concessions, instead of being supported, they have been ill-treated and driven out of the country. We know perfectly well the history of our land. We know about the clearances of the Highlands, about the peasantry being driven out not only by soldiers but by bloodhounds. We appeal to the Tory party to put into practice what it preaches. Tories are always accusing the Labour party of not practising what it preaches. We are giving the Government an opportunity to practice what it preaches, to show some semblance of charity and of consistency to those folk who have only this small measure of pleasure in life. If the concession is made it will redound to the Government's credit; if it is not made the fact will be held up to the Tory party for all time that they are not men of their word.

10.0 P.M.

Sir ROBERT HUTCHISON: In view of the concession which the Government gave us last week, I intervene to state that there is much to be said on this question. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has my sympathy in his attempts to defend a rotten case. The only defence he can put forward is that entertainments like agricultural shows might be put into the hands of a contractor. This Debate has drawn the attention of the Committee to the fact that representatives of the industrial world here are at last beginning to understand that there is an agricultural problem. The real trouble is that the industrial world has everything that it wants and the agricultural people have been left out of the picture. Members of the Labour party are at last awakening to the fact that agriculture is in need of help. Therefore, I appeal to the Chancellor of the Exchequer to give this small concession to agricultural shows, which are so necessary to agricultural life.

Mr. BUCHANAN: I should not have intervened in the Debate had it not been for the remarks of the last speaker. I know that the hon. and gallant Member was absent from the House for a year, and the reason he had that year's absence was because of the way in which he fulfilled his duties during his former period in the House when he represented Dunfermline Burghs.

Sir R. HUTCHISON: Kirkcaldy Burghs.

Mr. BUCHANAN: Well, that is adjacent to Dunfermline and in the same County of Fife. For 12 months the hon. and gallant Member represented that division, and I have yet to hear that during that period he uttered a single word on behalf of the agricultural labourer. He then represented industrial workers, and was only concerned with them. But now he has shifted from industry to agriculture, and yet he says that we are "at last" taking an interest in agriculture. If to-morrow Glasgow were stupid enough to accept him as Member, he would cease to be a keen agriculturist and would be a keen industrialist again. I think all who know the hon. Member for Dumbarton Burghs (Mr. Kirkwood) will agree that, whatever faults and failings he may have, he has always stood up for a square deal for the agricultural or the industrial worker, and I resent this reference which was made to him. He has always been willing to help workers of all kinds.
The Financial Secretary to the Treasury has shown a great amount of ability in his job, and he is, I think, the most pleasant Member of the Government. I often wish his superior could be half as pleasant. I think the right hon. Gentleman's pleasant manner and style would be even more pleasant if he gave us this small concession. We have in Scotland every year, as has been pointed out, a great occasion known as the Highland Show. It is held in a different town each year, one year in Dumfries, the next possibly in Dunfermline, and this year it is being held in Glasgow. People from all over Scotland foregather on that occasion, including many poor people, and one of the few generous things done by the railway companies is to afford cheap railway facilities in this connection. The Glasgow Corporation and other local bodies give the use of public parks and everybody concerned contrive to assist the show in every way, in order that agriculture should be given a help by the great industrial centres. All we are now asking is that the Government should join in helping the agricultural worker to have more success and more enjoyment as the result of these gatherings. Apart from their educational importance they are of great social benefit, and they are an antidote to drinking practices and other evils. They are all to the good, and I
hope for these reasons that the Financial Secretary to the Treasury will reconsider his decision.

Question put, "That the Clause be read a Second time."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 155; Noes, 237.

Division No. 168.]
AYES.
[10.10 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Rose, Frank H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hardie, George D.
Saklatvala, Shapurji


Amman, Charles George
Harney, E. A.
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Attlee, Clement Richard
Harris, Percy A.
Scrymgeour, E.


Baker, J. (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Scurr, John


Barker, G. (Monmouth, Abertillery)
Hastings, Sir Patrick
Sexton, James


Barnes, A.
Hayday, Arthur
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barr J.
Hayes, John Henry
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Batey, Joseph
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sitch, Charles H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, G. H.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Smillie, Robert


Briant, Frank
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Bromley, J.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Snell, Harry


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Spencer, G. A. (Broxtowe)


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Stamford, T. W.


Clowes, S.
Kennedy, T.
Stephen, Campbell


Cluse, W. S.
Kenyon, Barnet
Sutton, J. E.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Kirkwood, D.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. James H. (Derby)


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Lansbury, George
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Compton, Joseph
Lawson, John James
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Connolly, M.
Lindley, F. W.
Thurtle, E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Lowth, T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Crawfurd, H. E.
Lunn, William
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. C. P.


Dalton, Hugh
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Varley, Frank B.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Mackinder, W.
Viant, S. P.


Day, Colonel Harry
MacLaren, Andrew
Wallhead, Richard C.


Duckworth, John
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Walsh, Rt. Hon. Stephen


Duncan, C
March, S.
Warne, G. H.


Dunnico, H.
Maxton, James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Edwards, John H. (Accrington)
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Webb. Rt. Hon. Sidney


England, Colonel A.
Montague, Frederick
Welsh, J. C.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Morris, R. H.
Westwood, J.


Fenby, T. D.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Wheatley, Rt. Hon. J.


Forrest, W.
Murnin, H.
Whiteley, W.


Gibbins, Joseph
Naylor, T. E.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gillett, George M.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Gosling, Harry
Palin, John Henry
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Paling, W.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Greenall, T.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Greenwood, A. (Nelson and Colne)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Potts, John S.
Windsor, Walter


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Rees, Sir Beddoe
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Groves, T.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Grundy, T. W.
Riley, Ben
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
Ritson, J.
Sir R. Hutchison and Sir R.


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Hamilton.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Campbell, E. T.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Blades, Sir George Rowland
Cassels, J. D.


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Boothby, R. J. G.
Cautley, Sir Henry S.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Brass, Captain W.
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Chapman, Sir S.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.


Atkinson, C.
Briscoe, Richard George
Chilcott, Sir Warden


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brittain, Sir Harry
Christie, J. A.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'v)
Clarry, Reginald George


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Buckingham, Sir H.
Clayton, G. C.


Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Bull, Rt. Hon. Sir William James
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Bentinck, Lord Henry Cavendish-
Bullock, Captain M.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Berry, Sir George
Burman, J. B.
Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.


Betterton, Henry B.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Conway, Sir W. Martin


Cooper, A. Duff
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Couper, J. B.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberland, Whiteh'n)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N)
Hume, Sir G. H.
Rye, F. G.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Huntingfield, Lord
Salmon, Major I.


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Hurst, Gerald B.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cunliffe, Joseph Herbert
Jacob, A. E.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Kennedy, A. R. (Preston)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Kindersley, Major Guy M.
Sandon, Lord


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Lamb, J. Q.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Drewe, C.
Lloyd, Cyril E. (Dudley)
Shepperson, E. W.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Locker-Lampson, G. (Wood Green)
Simms, Dr. John M. (Co. Down)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Loder, J. de V.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Ellis, R. G.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Everard, W. Lindsay
McDonnell, Colonel Hon. Angus
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Macintyre, Ian
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Fermoy, Lord
Macnaghten, Hon. Sir Malcolm
Storry, Deans, R.


Finburgh, S.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Fleming, D. P.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Stuart, Crichton-, Lord C.


Ford, P. J.
Malone, Major P. B.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Margesson, Captain D.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral Murray Fraser


Fraser, Captain Ian
Merriman, F. B.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Ganzoni, Sir John
Mitchell, S. (Lanark, Lanark)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Gee, Captain R.
Moles, Thomas
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell-(Croydon, S.)


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Tinne, J. A.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Turton, Edmund Russborough


Goff, Sir Park
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Gower, Sir Robert
Moreing, Captain A. H.
Waddington, R.


Grace, John
Morrison, H. (Wilts, Salisbury)
War:, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Greene, W. P. Crawford
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arther Clive
Warner, Brigadier-General W. W.


Gretton, Colonel John
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Grotrian, H. Brent
Nelson, Sir Frank
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Newman, sir R. H. s. D. L. (Exeter)
watts, Dr. T.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Wells, S. R.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
White, Lieut.-Colonel G. Dairymple


Hammersley, S. S.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld.)
Williams, Herbert G. (Reading)


Hanbury, C.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Harland, A.
Oakley, T.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Harrison, G. J. C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hartington, Marquess of
Oman. Sir Charles William C.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hawke, John Anthony
Penny, Frederick George
Wise, Sir Fredric


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Womersley, W. J.


Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Pielou, D. P.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Pilditch, Sir Philip
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Henn, Sir Sydney H.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Herbert, Dennis (Hertford, Watford)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.)


Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Radford, E. A.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Ramsden, E.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Rawlinson, Rt. Hon. John Fredk. Peel
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)



Holland, Sir Arthur
Remer, J. R.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Rentoul, G. S.
Major Cope and Major Hennessy.


Hopkins, J. W. W.




Question, "That the Schedule, as amended, be the First Schedule to the Bill," put, and agreed to.

The CHAIRMAN: In accordance with the arrangement come to at an early hour this morning, I do not propose to select any further new Clauses.

Mr. RAWLINSON: May I ask with whom this arrangement was made? There are some very important new Clauses on the Paper. I, personally, was not here early this morning, and I do not know who made the arrangement.

The CHAIRMAN: If the right hon. Gentleman had been here, he would hive been aware of the arrangement. It was agreed to by all those who were in the
Committee at that moment that only two new Clauses, besides the first Government new Clause on the Paper, should be taken to-day, and that we should get to the Schedules at a reasonable time. I did say that if there were new Clauses of importance put down, which, owing to this arrangement, were not taken, I would mention them in conversation with Mr. Speaker, and no doubt he would take that into consideration when he came to select new Clauses on the Report stage.

Mr. RAWLINSON: On a point of Order. I would point out the serious
effect of that ruling on the rights of private Members, that when new Clauses are put down arrangements should be made to cut them out.

The CHAIRMAN: The right hon. Gentleman forgets that the Chair is expressly empowered to select Amendments and new Clauses, and no question of Order can arise as to the reasons for which the selection is made.

FIRST SCHEDULE.

ENACTMENTS APPLIED FOR PURPOSE OF DUTIES IMPOSED BY SECTION 3.

The CHAIRMAN: The Amendments in the name of the hon. Baronet the Member for West Wolverhampton (Sir Robert Bird), in page 16, line 5, to leave out "(4)," and in page 16, line 22, to leave out paragraph (4), are not in order, as, if carried, they would increase the charge on the taxpayer.

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, in page 17, line 27, after the word "or," to insert the word "Northern."

This is merely a drafting Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Motion made, and Question proposed, "That the Schedule, as amended, be the First Schedule to the Bill."

Captain BENN: I am very sorry the Amendment of the hon. Gentleman opposite to omit para. (4) was not in order. We are opposed to taxing imported commercial vehicles because we think it raises the price of commercial vehicles, but hon. Members opposite know quite well, and they have said so, that the reason for imposing the McKenna Duties on motor cars was to cheapen motor cars in this country. They say that by imposing these McKenna Duties you decrease overhead charges, increase output, get mass production, and no one has said that with greater emphasis than the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It is a very strange thing that those people who believe that the imposition of a duty upon motor cars cheapens the price of motor cars in this country at the same time—

The CHAIRMAN: This Clause merely recites the provisions enacted toy Clause
3, which has already been passed, and by itself it has had no effect. It is not possible to make a change in the law here, and, therefore, the hon. and gallant Member's observations are not in order.

Captain BENN: I submit that paragraph 4 is the only part of this Act which exempts commercial vehicles from taxation, and that they would be liable to taxation under Clause 3, but that under paragraph (4) of this Schedule—

The CHAIRMAN: The only question is whether the enactments have been properly set forth.

Captain BENN: The Act has lapsed. It is not the law of the land.

The CHAIRMAN: If the hon. and gallant Gentleman will read the title of the Schedule, he will see it is, "Enactments applied for purpose of duties imposed by Section 3," and then it recites Sub-sections (1), (3), (4), (5) and (6) of Section 13 of Finance (No. 2) Act; 1915. There is nothing enacted by this; it is merely a recital of Sub-sections in a former Act which are now re-enacted again by Clause 3 of this Bill.

Captain BENN: I would direct your attention to the fact that these duties, and all the correlated enactments in the Act of 1915 were repealed last year by the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and are being re-enacted in the Schedule.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. and gallant Member must read Sub-section (2) of Clause 3, in which it says:
shall have effect as if they were re-enacted in this Act,
and this is merely setting forth what they are. No question of policy can possibly arise on this Schedule.

SECOND SCHEDULE.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I beg to move, in page 18, line 18, column 2, to leave out "1s. 0d.," and to insert instead thereof "3d."
This is the first of a series of Amendments from this side of the Committee put forward with the object of reducing the Customs duties on silk. At this stage of the Bill it is not possible for us to ask for the abolition of these duties,
but it is possible, as this Amendment proposes to do to endeavour to mitigate the harm which the Silk Duties will do by reducing the figure which stands in the Schedule to the figure which is proposed by the Amendment. I have no wish to take up a great deal of the time of the House in going over the arguments which have already been put forward in regard to the Silk Duties. I will confine myself to summing up the position very briefly.
There are two main objections which we on this side of the Committee have to the Silk Duties. The first is the injury which they will impose upon the silk consumer, and the second is the injury they will do to the trade. With regard to the consumer, I will confine myself to saying here that part of this tax and the burden of this tax falls upon the poorer people of this country, and we are utterly unable to see how the Chancellor of the Exchequer can reconcile the imposition of these taxes on the working people of this country without any concession to the workpeople in any other part of the Budget. In regard to the injury to the trade the point of view we put forward is the interference with the industry brought about by the Customs duties. Since the duty first appeared in the Budget the Chancellor of the Exchequer had met the representations of the trade to a partial extent. He has bought off the opposition of the trade by certain concessions. That, however, is only partial, because to a very large extent there is still considerable opposition in the trade to the duties proposed by the Chancellor. Even, however, so far as he has bought off the opposition of the trade, I want to remind the Committee that he has bought it off, not by taking his hand off the trade, and allowing it to expand as otherwise it would do, but by making concessions which will enable the trade to make larger profits.
In other words, he is not restoring the trade to the position which it would attain to but for his interference; he is merely enabling those concerned to make a larger profit on a smaller return, and so the equipoise for the trade, speaking for the manufacturers, is not equalled for the country, because it is the volume of trade rather than the profit made by the proprietors with which the country as a
whole is concerned. It is not satisfactory from the point of view of the country as a whole that the trade should be bought off by enabling them to make a larger profit on a smaller output and on a smaller number employed. I should like to emphasise this particular question by pointing to the fact that a large amount of silk will come into this country by what may be described as legalised smuggling. It is not illegal, it is perfectly true, to introduce silk on the person. It will not be illegal for people who travel abroad to bring back a good deal with their luggage, and that form of legalised smuggling will injure the trade of this country, both wholesale and retail. While in that way it will do a great deal of harm to the country, it will not bring in any revenue to the State.
Our object in moving to reduce the amount of this tax is therefore to lessen the burden on the consumer, to lessen the interference with trade, and to reduce the incentive to this legalised smuggling which will otherwise take place. The Chancellor of the Exchequer clearly considers that as this is a growing industry he can afford to interfere with it without reducing the actual receipts for next year as against the current year. We say that the fact that it is an increasing industry is a reason for keeping his hands off it, because when unemployment is increasing it is a disastrous thing that the one industry making headway and employing larger numbers of people should be the subject of interference by the Chancellor. We all know that small boys are fond of putting their fingers into watches and other things to see how the works go, and though the consequences are sometimes very serious for the watch, they stop there. When, however, a man, no longer a boy, puts an iron bar into the moving parts of machinery, it is very likely that the injury to himself, the machinery, and other people may be very serious indeed. When the Chancellor of the Exchequer interferes with a trade which is of great benefit to the people of this country, and is likely to give wider employment if left alone, we ask him to take his hands off; and, in so far as we are not able to secure the removal of all interference, we ask that the burden should at least be reduced to the minimum.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Whatever may be the defects of the Silk Duties I am sure the Committee will feel they would not be removed by the substitution of the scale for which the hon. Gentleman has made himself responsible for the one proposed by the Government. In the first instance, the Revenue would be entirely destroyed. £1,000,000 would be all that would remain as the result of all these duties, all the machinery, all the labour—

Captain BENN: I thought it was going to cost nothing. I thought the right hon. Gentleman explained that no initial machinery was required.

Mr. CHURCHILL: All the processes of collecting the duties, all the elaborate arrangements, the drawbacks, the rebates and so forth, on which the hon. and gallant Member has dwelt so long and so often—all of these must continue. The entire structure of the tax would be operative, every evil, as placed at its highest by those who oppose the duties, would still continue, but with no results, except a paltry £1,000,000—I beg the Committee's pardon, I ought not to have used such an expression, which is not a proper adjective to apply to so great a sum of money. Nothing but £1,000,000 would come into the Exchequer, and £5,000,000 of revenue would be lost by the substitution of this scale. Whatever inconvenience may be urged against the duty, whatever disadvantages there may be, whatever friction there may be—all would remain with the new scale. I can quite understand people opposing the Silk Duties, and many have done so, but it is not conceivable that anyone should be willing to acquiesce in the Silk Duties and yet wish to apply them in this very unreal manner. This proposed scale, if I were to criticise it, could be shown to be full of anomalies, and in its working would be found to be most injurious to the trades affected. The scale which is in the Schedule has been worked out after prolonged negotiations and infinite discussions with many different branches of the trade, and most of them acquiesce. The hon. Member for West Leicester (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence) told us about the man putting a bar into the machine and the effects it might have; but since these duties have been announced, so far from there being any
falling off in the employment or in the values of the silk trade and the branches of the silk trade, there has been an improvement in all their values. [HON. MEMBERS: "The duty is not in force yet!"] The mere anticipation has created an improvement in all their values. From every quarter I have information of new factories and new enterprises, and I am assured that the cost of artificial silk will not undergo anything but a temporary rise, and that the tax will be collected without much extra expense. I do not propose to go into these matters to-night, and events alone will show whether the course we have adopted is the correct one. I trust the Committee will adhere to the Schedule which we have worked out with the utmost labour and care. I think even those who oppose the Silk Duty will agree with me that it is much better to have a Schedule carefully worked out in conjunction with representatives of the trade, and at the same time have a Schedule which will produce a substantial return to the Exchequer.

Sir ALFRED MOND: I think it is pretty evident by this time that the more these duties are examined and discussed the more unfortunate they appear. During a recent visit which I made for political purposes to Lancashire I was unable to find even amongst the supporters of the party opposite anyone who did not condemn this tax on artificial silk. What was the universal opinion held on that subject amongst all those who understand this question?

Mr. CHURCHILL: That they do not object to these duties.

Sir A. MOND: There is only one opinion amongst those who understand these taxes, and it is that they cannot possibly do anything but harm to the textile industry. It is like putting sand into the machine. The Chancellor of the Exchequer gave away a large part of his case to-night, forgetting that he had denied in previous Debates that what he was going to do would increase the expense of the Customs and Excise. He has opposed this Amendment to-night on the ground that the great machinery and labour which this tax involves would really not be worth while considering for £1,000,000 a year. Therefore, he admits that there will be great expense and a
great labour involved in administering these taxes.

Mr. CHURCHILL: No.

Sir A. MOND: The right hon. Gentleman cannot deny that his new form of Excise taxation must inevitably increase the expenditure—

The CHAIRMAN: We are now concerned only with the Customs Duties and not with Excise.

Sir A. MOND: I am grateful for your correction, Mr. Hope, but it was the right hon. Gentleman who led me on to the Excise. What he has done, if I may say so, in the Schedule which he has introduced, is to emphasise the protective nature of his Budget, to convert what was once a Free Trade balance as between Customs and Excise into a much more protective measure, which, although it may possibly suit some of those who are manufacturing artificial silk, is to the disadvantage of those who are utilising it in their industry and wish to export. I am told—I am not an expert on the matter myself—

Mr. REMER: Hear, hear!

Sir A. MOND: I am told this by men who have had a life-long experience of this industry—much more experience even than the hon. Member, who is considered to know something about timber. All those, I do not care what their political party may be, who are interested in cotton or wool, will tell you with one voice that the elaborate rebate proposals put forward by the right hon. Gentleman in endeavouring to alleviate the situation will not in practice work out, and that all the attempts he has made to meet the difficulties are unsatisfactory, while the only proposal which would have been satisfactory to them has not been accepted. It is no use hon. Members burying their heads like ostriches in the sand, and not realising or admitting what is an obvious fact throughout the textile industry, namely, that there is a firm objection of a violent character against the whole of this duty, and that it will become more vocal as time goes on. I regret that at a time of great depression, when we want to expand our export trade, we should, for no really good reason, put difficulties in the way of those who are struggling, as they are
to-day, in order to keep looms working in the northern districts. It is useless to contend that no result will happen; it is useless for the right hon. Gentleman to say he is taxing a rising business, that not much harm will be done. Whatever influence his duties have, they will have an influence in the wrong direction. They must have an influence economically in the wrong direction. The right hon. Gentleman must know that as well as anyone else, and I cannot understand why he has not had the courage to abandon this proposal. I am sure that if he did so it would be much more in the national interest than forcing it on the trade by the aid of a majority which is indifferent to what happens to the textile industries of this country.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir JOSEPH NALL: The right hon. Gentleman takes the opportunity of this question whether the Customs Duty should be reduced to vent what he believes to be the objections of the textile areas to these duties as a whole. As a matter of fact, as the right hon. Gentleman and his friends know, not one single word of objection has been raised against the Customs Duty; so far as any objection is raised at all, it is only against the Excise Duty. That, as was pointed out recently by my hon. Friend the Member for Rossendale (Mr. Waddington), indicates an extraordinary change of opinion in that part of the country, which, even in these days, is supposed still to retain a few reputed Free Traders. Throughout all this controversy, the objections that have been raised, and to some extent are still being raised, relate almost entirely to the Excise Duty. The right hon. Gentleman tells the Committee that during a recent visit to Lancashire he heard of these objections. As a matter of fact, he went down there and scolded Lancashire because they were not making sufficient objection.

Sir A. MOND: No, what I said was that they were not making their objection sufficiently vocal to make Members of this House who do not know Lancashire conditions understand what Lancashire was thinking. Lancashire Members were not defending Lancashire interests.

Sir J. NALL: The only unfortunate thing about that is that, in spite of the right hon. Gentleman's exhortation,
Lancashire has not responded to his lead, largely realising that the sound business policy is to meet the real business point which arises in connection with this duty and make the thing workable, so that any interruption of trade which it was believed might have arisen may be avoided. The fact is that from first to last the agitation which a few Members on the other side of the House are attempting to stimulate, and are exasperated when they find they are unable to stimulate, is falling flat. Throughout the length and breadth of the cotton counties you cannot find any real volume of opinion in opposition to these duties except in those quarters which have been and apparently remain hostile to the present Government.

Mr. J. HUDSON: I think the Chancellor of the Exchequer is at last to be congratulated on having discovered in Lancashire at any rate one apparently ardent supporter of the proposals which we are now discussing. I am pretty certain, as one who also has some little connection with Lancashire, as well as Yorkshire, that the position has been very badly estimated by the hon. Gentleman who has just sat down. He informs us that there is no objection whatever to the import taxes. In that he has the full agreement of the hon. Member for Moss Side (Mr. Hurst). He is equally mistaken, for the facts, as I see them, are that at present the supply of artificial silk to the textile industries of Lancashire and Yorkshire cannot be met by the home industry. Courtaulds are having to ration the industry generally and the manufacturers in both Lancashire and Yorkshire, who use this material as a general mixture in the warps and otherwise, are compelled to go abroad to supply themselves with this raw material. Indeed, the first objections I got in Huddersfield were not at all with regard to Excise but with regard to the tax that is placed upon commodities imported into the country. I can assure the two hon. Members who represent Manchester Divisions that they are entirely mistaken regarding Lancashire, for I have found in the Lancashire area, in the Nelson district, that that is a similar experience to the one I have quoted with reference to Huddersfield. I have no doubt at all that when this matter comes to be put to the test—and ultimately hon. Members will have to take
the test, though for the present in the by-election at Oldham they have managed to dodge the situation—the fate of the hon. Member for Moss Side at a former election, when the issues were not clouded over by pledges which have since been broken, will be repeated and a similar fate will befall the hon. and gallant Member for Hulme (Sir J. Nall) as well.

Colonel GRETTON: This is an Amendment to reduce the tax on raw material, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer, in answering the Mover of the Amendment, apparently made a statement that, if the Amendment were carried, it would leave only £1,000,000 of the tax to be collected as a result of the efforts of this House I do not think he meant that.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I never meant that. If the alternative Schedule were carried—and this Amendment is the first of a series of Amendments—the yield would be reduced to £1,000,000.

Colonel GRETTON: I am glad the right hon. Gentleman has made that quite clear. I understood him in that sense, but it was not quite clear. What I should like to ask him is what would be the estimated reduction in the Customs Duty receivable if there were no tax on raw material, because a tax on raw material is a most questionable expedient. It is taxing the very grist that goes to the mill of British industry. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hops!"] There are exceptions, but I am saying it is a very questionable expedient. There were special reasons, which I explained at the time, why there should be a tax on imported hops for a period. But no one has explained why a tax on this raw material is justifiable, except that the Chancellor of the Exchequer wishes to put a tax on luxuries. There are great disadvantages, because when he once taxes raw materials, he is committing himself to the whole process of drawbacks upon every article of that character which is made out of raw material and exported from the country. I do not think this particular Amendment is a satisfactory one. I doubt if any other Amendment would be in order, as the Committee has already passed words which make it necessary to have a tax on raw material. I hope the right hon. Gentleman will reconsider that decision on Report.
As regards the general scheme of Customs duties, I would far rather take
his statement than the scheme of the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Benn), because his scheme is an effective Customs duty, while the other is to be an emasculated, ineffective and unworkable scheme.

Captain BENN: My right hon. Friend and I have put down a scale of duties which is not emasculated, and which is merely a most defensible restoration of the Schedule. This Amendment is an Amendment put down for the purpose of raising a discussion, and is quite a separate thing.

Colonel GRETTON: Other Members of the Committee may not agree with the hon. and gallant Member, but the majority in the House will probably prefer, if we are going to have a Customs Duty—and I support a Customs duty—to adopt the scale recommended by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. My purpose in rising is to ask the right hon. Gentleman what the Customs duty on raw material is worth to the Treasury? If he cannot answer that question now immediately, I hope he will be able to do so before this question is finally decided on Report. I am afraid I cannot support the Amendment moved, because it would still remain a Customs Duty and contain all the trouble of drawbacks, and so forth, and the only proper way to deal with this matter of raw material is either to have a duty worth collecting, or to do away with the duty altogether. There ought to be no duty on raw material sent into this country to supply British manufacturers except under special circumstances and where there is a strong case and considerable justification.

Mr. HARRIS: Apparently the hon. Member opposite who claims the right to speak for Lancashire, seems to think that the whole of the textile trade in that great cotton county regards this particular duty, not only with favour, but with enthusiasm. How a tax on silk waste of all kinds can be of benefit to the textile trade is beyond my understanding. If the Chancellor of the Exchequer would let us into the secrets of his heart he would have to tell us that he is Very sorry to have touched these Silk Duties. We cannot regard this particular tax in its
effect on only one or two particular articles.
In discussing the elaborate Schedule which we have before us now, late at night, it would be impossible to touch all the various interests that will be affected. I have taken the trouble to find out some of the articles that are likely to be affected by these Duties. Many of them are very small things in themselves, but though they are small things in themselves they are part of the trade which this country does with the whole world, and by means of which a great number of people are employed. For instance, there is silk braid. That is a small article which is exported in large quantities attached to various articles. There is silk cord. This country does not produce the silk and has to import the pure silk from abroad, but we manufacture the silk cord for the whole world. Then there is millinery wire. Silk is twisted round the wire, and this is an article which is used in millinery and in the made-up trade, and many factories in Derbyshire and the North of England are occupied in manufacturing this particular article. It would be impossible to get a drawback on these goods, Because silk braid, silk cord, silk trimming and so on do not necessarily go out in the original manufactured form but as attached to various articles.
When the Government try by an elaborate series of drawbacks to meet the various interests concerned, they find that it is impossible to make the necessary formula to deal with each case. There are articles such as silk linings which are used in ladies' millinery, ladies' coats and ladies' garments, and it would be quite impossible for the exporter to claim a drawback on them. If he tried to claim a drawback, the procedure would be so elaborate that it would not be worth the expense. In a moment of rashness, the Chancellor of the Exchequer pointed out that if the duties were reduced it would not be worth all the cost of the elaborate machinery that he was setting up. This will involve elaborate machinery, not only to the Customs, to the Government, to the State Department concerned, and to the Board of Trade, but to our merchants and manufacturers. It is because Lancashire, which is far-seeing and usually looks ahead, sees that these Silk Duties are going to strike a death blow at the pre-
dominance of this country as the textile manufacturing centre of the world, that it is opposed to these duties, and regards them as thoroughly unsound.
11.0 P.M.
One point to which I would like to refer before it is too late to make an alteration, is that silk is being used in mixtures with cottons and woollens, not necessarily in large proportions, but very often in small proportions. I have studied this Schedule very closely, and as far as I can see it is impossible, however skilful the arrangements may be, for the shippers of cotton goods and woollen goods containing artificial silk or pure silk to get the necessary drawbacks. Every day brings more and more evidence that this particular duty is likely in the end to strike a death blow at the textile trade, and I ask the Committee to look at the matter from a non-party point of view and to vote against it.

Mr. MACKINDER: I take the opportunity offered by the last few minutes of this Debate to offer a little criticism of the main provisions of this proposed tax on raw materials. Whatever term the Chancellor may give to it, it is a tax on the raw material. It is a tax on a very important raw material, and as such it is bound to affect the industries which use that material. I was interested to read this morning that a meeting had been held between a representative of the Customs and Members of Parliament who are interested in the textile trade. I was also interested to find that not a single representative of the textile trade from these benches was present. I do not know whether the Chancellor thinks that we have no assistance to offer. [HON. MEMBERS: "No!"] Hon. Members opposite may think that that is the reason, but there are Members on these benches who understand the textile trade, who may be able to give the Chancellor some assistance in avoiding some of the difficulties which he is going to fall into.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I took no part in choosing those who attended. There was a certain numbers of Members who wanted a general discussion on points on which they had some doubt, but I am sure that if hon. Gentlemen opposite have any observations of a relevant character, we should be delighted to hear them.

Mr. MACKINDER: If the right hon. Gentleman will take notice of what I offered in my first contribution to this Debate, we offered what small knowledge was at our disposal to prevent him from getting into some of the pitfalls into which he will fall. But, more significant still, when the Budget was first introduced, deputations from the West Hiding of Yorkshire made arrangements to meet the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I was invited by the Bradford Chamber of Commerce to go along with their deputation to meet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, but the Chancellor refused to meet any Labour members along with that deputation from the Chamber of Commerce. I want to suggest that while he has the right to refuse to meet any deputation, he has no right, when he agrees to meet a deputation, to decide the personnel of that deputation. He met us with very scant courtesy, because if he had met us along with that deputation we might have put some points before him which would have guided him.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The hon. Gentleman is a little unreasonable in his attitude. The deputation from Bradford wished to see me. Then there was a question as to whether the members of other districts adjacent should come too, and I deprecated that, as I thought that the better place for them to discuss the matter would be in the House of Commons. It was suggested that these members would come, but that they did not wish to take any part in that deputation. I did not think that that was the kind of invitation to which political opponents would wish to respond. For that reason I left it on the basis that those Members who were supporters of the Government would attend that deputation, but that we would not ask political opponents to come. It would be a very silly thing to have speeches at deputations which were merely repetitions of debates in this House.

Mr. MACKINDER: We are always very pleased to hear the Chancellor of the Exchequer explain his case. But there is another point. In the morning he received a deputation from Yorkshire without the Members of Parliament, but in the afternoon he met the deputation from Lancashire with the Members of Parliament. That is something he might possibly be able to explain.

Mr. CHURCHILL: In each case I deferred to the wishes of the commercial men who formed the deputation.

HON. MEMBERS: That is not true.

The CHAIRMAN: We are getting rather far away from the merits of the Amendment.

Mr. MACKINDER: If hon. Members do not wish to hear our points of view expressed, I cannot help it; but I challenge the right hon. Gentleman's statement that he deferred in each case to the desire of the deputation. He did not defer to the desire of the Yorkshire deputation, because, when approached and asked whether or not I would desire to speak on that deputation, I assured the gentlemen that all I desired to do was to listen to question and answer. As a result of the Chancellor's decision we were told by the Chamber of Commerce that we would not be expected to accompany the deputation. All that, however, is in the past. What I want to say now is that we are not all—shall I say—captious critics. We offer constructive criticism at times, and possibly the Chancellor may have benefited by any small knowledge that we possess. But he must take responsibility for what happened. I am rather interested in discussing the point of view that cannot be separated from the point of view of the Import Duties, and that is the question of drawback. May I make a suggestion to the Chancellor of the Exchequer? I would make an almost definite statement, though I am not the son of a prophet. The Chancellor of the Exchequer will not work a through ticket—that is, to import the yarn and ration that yarn out to the manufacturers, and know definitely before it is rationed or manufactured whether or not it will be used for export or whether it will be used for home trade. I suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer that the only thing he can do without dislocating trade—we know that, even if only in the smallest degree, he will dislocate trade—is to let the manufacturer pay the tax on the import at the source of issue, and let him then issue a declaration on the goods that he manufactures as to how much silk they contain. That declaration must accompany the goods from the
manufacturer right through the chain of wholesalers until finally it reaches the exporting merchant. That, I think, is the easiest way. But it involves something else. It means that not only will the manufacturer have to make a declaration as to the amount of silk in the material that he makes, but he will also have to issue a declaration that there is no silk whatever in any other goods that he makes.
If the person exports goods with no silk at all, he will have to satisfy the Customs authorities that there is no silk in them. I can see they are going to be mixed up in a wholesale series of taxes. I noticed the other day it was suggested that we could put up a place for making tests. The Bradford Corporation established such a place long before the War and it cost something like £60,000. The "Daily Despatch" in Manchester has found a solution of this difficulty, but it only deals with imported yarns and does not deal—nor could anybody, except, possibly, the Chancellor—with any way of exporting the tissue. It is the greatest hurdle I have ever heard of in my life in connection with such matters. I do not say I wish the right hon. Gentleman luck. It is not luck that wins through, but knowledge and capacity, but the right hon. Gentleman is going to require all the assistance he can get. It is no use saying that Lancashire is satisfied or that Macclesfield is satisfied.

Mr. REMER: I do most certainly say Macclesfield is satisfied. The hon. Gentleman cannot say there is even one person in Macclesfield dissatisfied.

Mr. MACKINDER: I dare say we can assume from that statement that Oldham is also satisfied. Does it not appear strange, that Leek depends upon silk, Macclesfield depends upon silk, Lancashire depends upon silk, Yorkshire depends upon silk, and the only reaction comes from—

Mr. CHURCHILL: And I depend upon silk.

Mr. MACKINDER: The Chancellor is going to depend upon silk. It appears to me that we shall have to depend upon our own ingenuity to get out of the trouble into which the right hon. Gentleman is leading us. It would be an act of
grace on his part if even now he were to cut out the whole thing. It is not worth all the trouble. I appeal to him seriously on behalf of this industry. We on the Labour benches are not supposed to care anything about industry, but we do want to look after our industries. We do not want to see our export trade going down. Some day we shall have the export trade and we shall manage it successfully. We do not want the machine broken before we take hold of it. We do not want to see unemployed increasing by thousands. It is a terrible thing for any man to go to bed thinking that any action of his has created more unemployment. This matter is too important to us in Yorkshire, whatever it may be in Lancashire, and whatever about Macclesfield, they do not want the silk tax in the sister town of Leek.

Mr. REMER: Does that apply to the manufacturers?

Mr. MACKINDER: The workpeople do not, at all events. It would be interesting to know if the Chancellor is going to meet a deputation of workpeople before the opportunity is taken away from them of making an effective protest. I protest against these taxes. I am Satisfied they will do harm to the trade, and I am further satisfied that all the undoubted ingenuity of the right hon. Gentleman will not get him over the great hurdles which these taxes present.

Mr. FENBY: I desire to refresh the memory of the Chancellor of the Exchequer with regard to what happened in connection with these deputations, and I should like to ask him if he will send for a copy of the letter which he sent to the Bradford Chamber of Commerce when the meeting with the deputation was arranged. The right hon. Gentleman will remember that I had a personal conversation with him as to whether he would receive a deputation from the Bradford Chamber of Commerce on the proposed Silk Duties. He referred me to his private secretary, to whom I suggested that, as a Member for Bradford, I should like to accompany that deputation. I was warned by the secretary of the Bradford Chamber of Commerce to be ready to go with that deputation, and so were other Members for Bradford and other constituencies
interested in this industry, and after remaining in London, putting off other important engagements, at a quarter-past two, the day before the deputation was to meet the Chancellor of the Exchequer, we were simply told that if it was accompanied toy Members of Parliament it would not be received by the right hon. Gentleman. I should like to know if Members of Parliament have a right, personally, to interview and to accompany their constituents to members of the Government.

The CHAIRMAN: I think we must keep to the present and not go into what we did in the past, however wrong the Chancellor of the Exchequer may have been.

Mr. FENBY: On a point of Order. What I am coming to is this: As the hon. Member for Shipley (Mr. Mackinder) pointed out, it might have been that even a Member of Parliament could have been of some assistance to the deputation and to his highness the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The CHAIRMAN: The Chancellor of the Exchequer may have been right or he may have been guilty of the greatest discourtesy and foolishness, but really it does not affect the merits of the duties now proposed, and I must ask hon. Members to confine themselves to the question. I shall not allow the Chancellor of the Exchequer to vindicate himself.

Mr. FENBY: We in Yorkshire and the people in Lancashire and in Macclesfield ask to be protected against these particular duties, and they ask us to protest against them. The hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Remer) said that nobody in Macclesfield objected. I was passing through Macclesfield (yesterday, and a gentleman concerned in the silk industry objected personally to me against the duties.

Mr. REMER: Name!

Mr. FENBY: I am not compelled to give the name. [Interruption.] The hon. Member for Macclesfield has probably a greater right than I have to say what happens in Macclesfield so far as these Silk Duties are concerned, but he has no right to say that nobody objects
to them when I myself spoke to a man yesterday who did object.

HON. MEMBERS: Name!

Mr. FENBY: I am not going any further. [Interruption.]

The CHAIRMAN: If the hon. Member does not wish to give the name, neither I nor the Committee has the right to force him to give it.

Mr. FENBY: It is given to Members on all sides that, if they make a statement, they have some reason for making that statement, and I am not here to say what is not the truth. I wish to protest against these Silk Duties. Every Member here who is doing his duty has a perfect right to make the views of his constituents known to the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and I say it is not fair for the right hon. Gentleman to be prepared to listen to the views of some of those interested in this particular industry and not to the views of others.

Miss WILKINSON: I want to bring to the notice of the Chancellor of the Exchequer a communication which I have received from certain of the unions in the clothing trades about the effect that the proposed silk tax is going to halve on the making-up trades in this country, particularly those dealing with the cheaper classes of silk cloth. The right hon. Gentleman has had his attention called to that kind of cloth called by various names, but which, I think, in the trade is called bourrette, which is made from the very last and lowest class of waste from the silk cocoons. Its cost, I believe, is from 9d. to 10d. a lb. The retail price works out at about 9¾d. a yard. Its weight, approximately, is 4 ozs. to the yard, or 4½ yards to the lb., and the duty per yard is about 1s. 9d., which is, roughly speaking, 300 per cent. of the cost, insurance, and freight value. A good many frocks are imported from France. These frocks take, roughly, three yards of material per frock; that is to say, when these frocks are imported on the 33⅓ per cent. basis, they are liable to a duty of 1s. a frock, being at the rate of 4d. per yard of material used in their manufacture. But if the British manufacturer buys the material in order to make up the frocks, he will have to pay
1s. 9d. a yard, whereas his competitors' goods not made-up will only have to pay 4d. a yard. That is to say, there is a bonus given to the French manufacturer of 1s. 5d. a yard. This is going to be a very serious thing for a large number of makers-up of this class of goods.
It is not only going to make the cost prohibitive when you put a duty of 1s. 9d. per yard on material that only costs 9¾d. a yard, but it will throw out of work a very large number of women who are dependent upon this class of work. I do not know whether the right hon. Gentleman has taken these cheaper materials into consideration, but I am asked by the unions concerned in this class of labour, and who have already a Very large number of unemployed girls on their books, to bring this to the notice of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and ask him to make further inquiries with a view to seeing whether something cannot be done not to tax the makers-up in this country so enormously as compared with their foreign competitors. It is surely inconsistent for the party which talks so much about foreign competition to give such a bonus to foreign competition.

Captain BENN: I do not think it is possible that the Debate should terminate without a reply from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. The hon. Member for East Middlesbrough (Miss Wilkinson) has made a strong case, and it is not going to be put off by the silence of the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the absence of the Financial Secretary. Before I go further, I would like to ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer why he has changed the relative rate of the Customs and Excise Duties? The Import Duty on raw silk was 4s.; in the Finance Bill it is 3s. On silk tissues it has remained unchanged. On artificial silk the Excise paid was 2s. 6d.; in the Finance Bill it is 1s. Artificial yarns paid 3s.; in the Finance Bill 2s. On tissues it has remained the same? What does it mean? We are entitled to our own view of the wisdom of using the silk trade as a fiscal instrument, and making manufacturers of artificial silk into farmers of taxes. But what we are entitled to ask the Chancellor is why he has turned, what was brought in as a revenue proposal, into a protective tax? We really must have an answer to that ques-
tion. He defended his proposal on the ground that he must have revenue. I do not want to cover the ground that has been covered in the last few days, but I would point this out to the Chancellor of the Exchequer: The only Committee, as we have seen from the White Paper, that has examined the claim of the silk trade for a duty has refused it. There was a Committee that sat in 1923, about which the hon. Member for Maccles-field (Mr. Remer) knows something—he has been singularly silent of late in contrast to what he had to say before—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"] If the hon. Gentleman wishes to interrupt me I shall certainly give way—

Mr. REMER: No, thanks.

Captain BENN: The hon. Gentleman knows perfectly well that the question as to whether the silk trade should or should not have a protection tax was put before one of these precious Committees—

Mr. REMER: It was nothing of the kind.

Captain BENN: That is the statement which, forcible as it is—

Mr. REMER: I think I may say that the hon. and gallant Gentleman is simply unable to find out what happened in 1923. What really happened was that there was an inquiry into the state of the lace and silk industries. It was neither under the Safeguarding of Industries Act or anything else: it was simply an inquiry into these two trades. There was no question of a protective duty whatever in the course of this inquiry.

Captain BENN: I think the Committee will see. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"] I think the Committee ought to congratulate me on having got something from the hon. Gentleman. I trust he will not get into trouble with his lords and masters. [HON. MEMBERS: "Withdraw!"] The fact of the matter is that the Committee even by the terms of the White Paper, unhampered, examined into the trade, as the hon. Gentleman says with perfect freedom, and they did refuse—

Mr. REMER: Excuse me. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman is entirely mistaken. There were two on one side, and two on the other.

Captain BENN: —which resulted in the Committee refusing to recommend the duty. That is so well known that I am amazed that the hon. Member, who represents the one division in the country where there is not a dissatisfied man, should deny that the result of the inquiry was that the Committee refused to recommend a duty, and that at a time when the Government were unbound by any pledge. Then the matter lapsed, but now the Chancellor comes along—and we are entitled to say that it is camouflage—with a scheme which he defends first on the ground that it is a revenue scheme—customs balanced by excise, with a slight turn in favour of the home manufacturer—and then turns what was a revenue scheme into a Protectionist scheme, and when he is asked why he has got absolutely no defence. He can make no apologia, but that he can make an effective and convincing defence is, I think, very much open to doubt.
That is the first general point. The second point, with reference to drawbacks, we shall, of course, deal with more fully later on. I presume we shall be in order in doing it then, otherwise I should deal with it now—with the technical details about drawbacks, and the tax upon the made-up article. It presents a vast field of interest to us and of difficulty for the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Let me come to the point that was put by the hon. Lady the Member for East Middlesbrough (Miss Wilkinson). The Chancellor called this a luxury tax. That was his first line of defence. When the secret that had been so well kept was made public, and he learned what he was really doing, he abandoned the luxury-tax argument and compared this to the Sugar Duty, which is by no means a luxury tax. How does it work out? I do not know whether the hon. Lady—I was not so very attentive at that moment—[HON. MEMBERS: "Shame!"]—I am conscious of my loss—I am not quite sure whether the hon. Lady dealt with the example of the expensive frock.

Miss WILKINSON: No.

Captain BENN: Then I will deal with it. There is a material which I am told is called ninon, and I am told it may cost 12s. a yard. I am told by—[HON. MEMBERS: "Name!"] I shall take refuge in
the same device as the hon. Member for Macclesfield. I am told that a yard of ninon weighs an ounce. [Laughter.] The Chancellor and I are discussing the silk issue on almost equal terms, because we are both acquainted with it at second hand. We will suppose that it is, as I am informed, that a yard of ninon weighs an ounce. As 7s. 9d. per lb. the tax on a yard of ninon would be 6d.—the tax on this expensive material for the clothing of the rich is a 4 per cent. tax. Now I will come to the material—

Captain BOURNE: There is an Amendment standing in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Been) which deals with the tax of 7s. 9d. per yard. Surely this should be discussed on that Amendment and not on the question before the House, which is as to the duty on undischarged silk?

The CHAIRMAN: It is usual on the first Amendment dealing with a particular subject to allow a discussion beyond the limits of the Amendment, but, of course, the hon. and gallant Member will not repeat the same arguments on another occasion.

Captain BENN: I am entirely in your hands. If you think it necessary for me to reserve my argument until we reach a further Amendment, I shall be glad to do so, although I think it would be more convenient to make my criticisms now. We have established the fact that ninon is to be taxed on a 4 per cent. basis, and now I come to the cheap material. I will take for example noil cloth, which is what is called Government silk, imported from France, for the very good reason that the raw material is grown in France, and although it is real silk, it is of the poorest quality because it is made from the waste of the waste. This material is only worth 6d. a yard, and a yard weighs 4 ozs. Therefore it is not the light weight that the fine silk would be. The consequence is that the ninon material for the fine lady is taxed at only 4 per cent., while noil cloth for the poor work-girl is taxed at 300 per cent. I am only repeating the argument which was put forward by the hon. Member for East Middlesbrough (Miss Wilkinson). Of course, she asked what about the frocks? The Chancellor of the Exchequer, in his new zeal for Protection, will no doubt desire that we should, by proper means, have the manu-
facture created in this country, but what are you doing to meet the views of the supporters of Tariff Reform on the benches opposite. You are simply taxing the material for these frocks at 300 per cent.
My second point is that by this proposal you are saying that if you import the manufactured article you must pay 33⅓ per cent., but if you import the raw material you must pay 300 per cent. [HON. MEMBERS: "Oh, oh!"] But the facts are as I have stated and hon. Members who interrupt me should get up and defend themselves by arguments. Under these circumstances is it to be wondered at that the right hon. Gentleman should shuffle about on this question rather than such facts as these should be brought to light? The arrangements which the Chancellor of the Exchequer has made with the trade are simply chaos. His officials may tell him that this tax will work because they are professional optimists in this matter, but I would like to point out to the right hon. Gentleman that those actually engaged in the industry such as the silk section of the London Chamber of Commerce are opposing this tax because they think it is adopting a wrong principle in the trade which cannot be worked satisfactorily. Under these circumstances what is the use of trying to stifle debate when all the people working in this trade are likely to suffer severely. I would, with very great respect, but with real insistence, ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer to answer those two questions—the question put, documented and substantiated' by figures, by the hon. Member for East Middlesbrough, as to the relative taxation of rich and poor, and the further question that I put as to what defence there is, and on what grounds, for changing a system, which he introduced as a revenue system, into one of pure Protection.

Mr. CHURCHILL: This duty is still a revenue duty The object of the duty was revenue, and its object continues to be revenue. Originally, following the precedent of Mr. Gladstone in regard to the Tobacco Duty in 1864, we gave the turn of the market to the home trade, to the home producer, at every stage in the manufacture of silk, as against the foreign importer. Then a discussion took place in the House and in the country, and endeavouring, as I did, to allay apprehen-
sion and calm opposition, I made these slight concessions, which still left the duties with a turn similar to that which Mr. Gladstone introduced in 1864, though rather stronger, with very beneficial results, so far as I can see, to the trade interests concerned, who are, as far as I can make out, unanimously, or practically unanimously, satisfied with the aspect of the duties in their present form, whose trade, judging by the statistics which I have been forced to study, has undergone a slight improvement, and whose plans for employment have in nearly all cases indicated a certain expansion.
I quite agree that that does not cover the case of the consumer, but I hope that the case of the consumer will be dealt with, firstly, by the fact that he will be discharging a public duty in bearing a portion of the taxation of the country, and, secondly, by the fact that artificial silk is not, I believe, to be the subject of any serious or permanent increase in price, and will probably be used on a larger scale and at a cheaper price this time next year than it is now. I should have been glad if it had been found possible to have made the turn in favour of the home producer slightly less than it is, but in adjusting matters and endeavouring to find a new source of revenue, which I am sure will become a permanent revenue—for I am quite certain that this Silk Duty will never be taken off until at least the Tea Duty and the Sugar Duty have been taken off, until, in fact, every other form of indirect taxation has been swept away—in endeavouring to carry this permanent addition to our revenue into law I have undoubtedly found it necessary to do what I could to allay the apprehension of the various sections of the trade. But the substantial quality and character of the Duty still remain; it is a revenue duty, in the case of which four-fifths of the cost to the consumer should reach the Exchequer. As regards the tax on raw material of natural silk, that requires no countervailing Excise, because it finds no counterpart in domestic production. That is my answer to that. We had a long talk then about the discourtesy shown in not receiving Members of Parliament of all parties on these deputations.

The CHAIRMAN: I may remind the right hon. Gentleman that I stopped the hon. Member.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I only wish to say I am certain there was no discourtesy of any kind intended. I do not wish heat to be imparted into our discussions through any misunderstanding of that kind. I welcome gladly the advice of any competent authorities in the House, and if I can be placed in contact with them privately and receive any reasonable or helpful suggestions they shall be proved and examined, from whatever quarter they come, provided it is from people who have made a genuine study of the subject and have a genuine desire to facilitate the course of public business.
I come to the speech of the hon. Lady. It was a very excellent speech on a technical point. I am sure she will not expect me to follow out all the reactions of the very carefully considered figures which she has quoted. I should not be treating them with the respect they deserve if I attempted to do so in an answer across the floor of the House. While I have been in attendance upon the House for the greater part of the last few weeks, and continuously for the last three days, an inquiry into secondary refinements of the Silk Duties has been proceeding continuously, and one of the questions which has been engaging attention is this very specially limited product. It is not a very extensive importation. It is a special importation.

Miss WILKINSON: It is 10,000,000 yards imported annually.

Mr. CHURCHILL: That is not at all a large proportion of the general field of the duties. It is a new point that has come to light in the last few days. [Interruption.] If I am to be interrupted every single second, I will not bother the Committee any more. I cannot carry on a running conversation. This matter is being examined very carefully at present, and I hope to be able to suggest in the interval between now and the Report Stage, a modification which will not affect the structure of the tax, because it would certainly be a disproportionate weight of duty to place upon this particular fabric. I can promise that the figures which have been put forward by the hon. Lady, and the point which has been so emphatically enforced by her coadjutor, the hon. and gallant Gentleman on the back bench, will be carefully examined, and I shall probably have some announcement to make on the
Report stage. It is no use the hon. and gallant Gentleman using the expressions he has used because, obviously, we must carry on our business in one way or the other. Either Ministers have to respond to reasonably constructive points when they are put forward from one part of the Committee or another, or they are simply to sit still and meet everything with a dull negation, refuse to alter anything and rely upon the strength of their majority. I take the position that even at the eleventh hour, if any new suggestion is made of a character which is helpful and promotes the simplification of the tax, we will see that it is carefully considered and, if desirable, embodied in the legislation. I think that is a reasonable way of carrying on our business and I hope in doing that I am not going to be exposed to the countercharge "Oh! We never get to the end of these duties, for you are always introducing new points." The Schedule as it stands is the Schedule of the taxes and it is substantially, and for all purposes, our policy in regard to the taxes. If, in the interval before Report we find that a new line ought to be added to meet some special case such as this—and it is very creditable to the hon. Lady that she should have been able to bring it forward—then a considered Amendment on the subject could be introduced on Report stage.

Sir ROBERT HAMILTON: I rise to ask the Chancellor one question. [HON. MEMBERS: "Divide!"] He has just made a very important announcement, and I wish to ask what opportunity we shall have of discussing the alteration in the scale which He proposes to make. Shall we have a full opportunity on the Report stage?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The Report stage is a very important one, and two days will be allowed for the discussion of the Report stage of the Budget, and as far as the Government are concerned they will welcome an expression of opinion

through the most convenient channel and the proper authorities as to what will be the points which can best be selected on all sides, in order that the Report stage may really be devoted to the outstanding points of difference, and that is the answer to the question I am now asked and to any other questions of a similar kind.

Captain BENN: These are points of substance, and I want to ask the Chancellor whether I am right or not in my reading of the rules. The hon. Lady has raised a point about the four per cent. tax, and the Chancellor says between now and the Report stage he will consider it, and if necessary make an amendment on Report. That sounds a fair offer, but in point of fact he cannot make an amendment on Report, because one of the rules of the House is that on the Report stage of the Bill you cannot increase the charge—neither the Government nor anybody else—and therefore now is the last moment, because in another place no amendments are permitted, and this is the last effective opportunity.

Mr. CHURCHILL: It is reducing the charge.

Captain BENN: He knows perfectly well that on the Report stage he cannot make any effective financial alteration, and therefore if we pass this now we pass it for good.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The hon. and gallant Gentleman is not only unappeasable, but he is wrong. It is not possible to increase the charge in view of the elaborate series of precautions which the wisdom and experience of Parliament in the past has devised, but the charge can be reduced by the House at any time in debate. The only thing which suffers is the public Exchequer.

Question put: "That '1s. 0d.' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 229; Noes, 127.

Division No. 169.]
AYES.
[11.58 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Blades, Sir George Rowland


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Blundell, F. N.


Ainsworth, Major Charles
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Boothby, R. J. G.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bellairs, Commander Carlyon W.
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Benn, Sir A. S. (Plymouth, Drake)
Boyd-Carpenter, Major A.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Betterton, Henry B.
Brass, Captain W.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Birchall, Major J. Dearman
Brassey, Sir Leonard


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive


Briscoe, Richard George
Grotrian, H. Brent
Penny, Frederick George


Brittain, Sir Harry
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pielou, D. P.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Pilcher, G.


Buckingham, Sir H.
Hanbury, C.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Burman, J. B.
Harland, A.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Harrison, G. J. C.
Radford, E. A.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hartington, Marquess of
Rees, Sir Beddoe


Campbell, E. T.
Haslam, Henry C.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Cassels, J. D.
Hawke, John Anthony
Reid, D. D. (County Down)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Remer, J. R.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Henderson, Lieut.-Col. V. L. (Bootle)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Ladywood)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Chilcott, Sir Warden
Hoare, Lt. -Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Christie, J. A.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hohler, Sir Gerald Fitzroy
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Clarry, Reginald George
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sandon, Lord


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Shaw, Lt. -Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Cockerill, Brigadier-General G. K.
Hopkinson, A. (Lancaster, Mossley)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Conway, Sir W. Martin
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Cooper, A. Duff
Hudson, R. S. (Cumberl'nd, Whiteh'n)
Skelton, A. N.


Cope, Major William
Hume, Sir G. H.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Huntingfield, Lord
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Cowan, Sir Wm. Henry (Islington, N.)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Inskip, sir Thomas Walker H.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jacob, A. E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Lamb, J. Q.
Storry Deans, R.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Little, Dr. E. Graham
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Dalkeith, Earl of
Loder, J. de V.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Lougher, L.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Davies, Sir Thomas (Cirencester)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lumley, L. R.
Sykes, Major-Gen. Sir Frederick H.


Dixey, A. C.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, S.)


Drewe, C.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Thomson, Sir W. Mitchell-(Croydon, S.)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macintyre, Ian
Tinne, J. A.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Vaughan-Morgan, Col. K. P.


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Ward, Lt. -Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Elveden, Viscount.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Malone, Major P. B.
Watts, Dr. T.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wells, S. R.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Marriott, Sir J. A. R.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Merriman, F. B.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Meyer, Sir Frank
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Milne, J. S. Wardlaw-
Wilson, H. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Fermoy, Lord
Moles, Thomas
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Fielden, E. B.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Finburgh, S.
Moore, Sir Newton J.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Fleming, D. P.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Womersley, W. J.


Ford, P. J.
Morden, Colonel Walter Grant
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wood, Rt. Hon. E. (York, W. R., Ripon)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Wood, E.(Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wood, Sir Kingsley (Woolwich, W.).


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Neville, R. J.
Wood, Sir S. Hill- (High Peak)


Ganzoni, sir John
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Gee, Captain R.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G. (Ptrsf'ld.)



Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nuttall, Ellis
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sir Harry Barnston and Capt.


Goff, Sir Park
Oman, Sir Charles William C.
Margesson.


Gower, Sir Robert
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William



NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Bromfield, William
Crawfurd, H. E.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bromley, J.
Dalton, Hugh


Alexander. A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Buchanan, G.
Day, Colonel Harry


Ammon, Charles George
Cape, Thomas
Duckworth, John


Attlee, Clement Richard
Charleton, H. C.
Duncan, C.


Barr, J.
Clowes, S.
Dunnico, H.


Batey, Joseph
Clynes, Right Hon. John R.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)


Beckett, John (Gateshead)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Elveden, Viscount


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Compton, Joseph
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Connolly, M.
Fenby, T. D.


Broad, F. A.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Forrest, W.




Gibbins, Joseph
Lansbury, George
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Gillett, George M.
Lawson, John James
Sitch, Charles H.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lunn, William
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Mackinder, W.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Groves, T.
MacLaren, Andrew
Snell, Harry


Grundy, T. W.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Stamford, T. W.


Guest, J. (York, Hemsworth)
March, S.
Stephen, Campbell


Guest, Dr. L. Haden (Southwark, N.)
Maxton, James
Sutton, J. E.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Mitchell, E. Rosslyn (Paisley)
Thomson, Trevelyan (Middlesbro. W.)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Mond, Rt. Hon. Sir Alfred
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Morris, R. H.
Thurtle, E.


Hardie, George D.
Morrison, R. C. (Tottenham, N.)
Tinker, John Joseph


Harris, Percy A.
Murnin, H.
Varley, Frank B.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Naylor, T. E.
Viant, S. P.


Hayday, Arthur
Oliver, George Harold
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hayes, John Henry
Palin, John Henry
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Paling, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Hirst, G. H.
Pethick, Lawrence, F. W.
Welsh, J. C.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Ponsonby, Arthur
Westwood, J.


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Potts, John S.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Riley, Ben
Williams, David (Swansea, E.)


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Ritson, J.
Williams, Dr J. H. (Llanelly)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Robertson, J. (Lanark, Bothwell)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Robinson, Sir T. (Lancs., Stratford)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
Windsor, Walter


Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Rote, Frank H.
Wright, W.


Kelly, W. T.
Saklatvala, Shapurji
Young, Robert (Lancaster, Newton)


Kennedy, T.
Salter, Dr. Alfred



Kirkwood, D.
Scurr, John
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—




Mr. Barnes and Mr. Warne.

The CHAIRMAN: There is on the Paper a number of Amendments in the name of the hon. and gallant Member for Leith Burghs (Captain Benn). Perhaps he will explain their purpose.

Captain BENN: I am very grateful for the opportunity of doing so. These Amendments are a collective series of Amendments, and are part of a constructive Schedule prepared by members of the trade as better than the Schedule of the Bill. The alteration in terminology is merely to provide a better graduated category. Hon. Members who are acquainted with the trade will be able to confirm or to contest that view. A second point is that we are endeavouring to restore the Customs' duty to the figure at which it was originally, and to eliminate the Protective element. That subject we have discussed in Committee, and I shall not deal with it further now. I would ask the Financial Secretary whether he would consider the question of amending the category, especially with reference to the mysterious things called "Spun, Scheppes, and noils", with a view to meeting the practical objections of the trade?

The CHAIRMAN: I shall call on the hon. and gallant Member to move his Amendment relating to "Spun, Scheppes, and noils", and then he can argue the series together.

Captain BENN: I beg to move, in page 18, line 27, at the end, to insert the words,


"Spun, Scheppes, and noils
4s.
9d."

Mr. GUINNESS: The Schedule which the hon. and gallant Gentleman suggests as an alternative for our Schedule is not merely different in terminology but, what is much more important, different in the way of Duty. It is quite clearly his object, not merely to keep the scales even, but to tilt them slightly in favour of the foreigner. He has shown great restraint in the briefness of his speech in moving the Amendment. I shall follow his example in replying. I have a good many details showing how the particular scale suggested would operate against the home producer, but I think it is enough to say in general that we have worked out our Schedule, amended as it has been, in close consultation with the Silk Association of Great Britain and Ireland. It is true that two or three members of that Association have expressed their dissatisfaction. Of course, there are varying interests represented in the Association. There is the importer's interest, which is different from the interest of the home producer, but the Association as a whole has accepted the Schedule. I have here a letter, dated 6th June, from the Secretary of the Association to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. In that letter he states that he has been dealing with the
objections to the Schedule of certain firms whose names are known to hon. Members opposite as to all Members of the House, and he says:
The points raised by these traders have been fully discussed by the President on at least two occasions, and he says, on behalf of the Association, he has already informed these members of the Association that the matter is, from their point of view, closed, and we have accepted the scales of duties and rebates as they now stand.
That being so, it is impossible for the Government to depart from the agreement which they have reached with the Silk Association and we must therefore ask the Committee to keep the terms in favour of the home producer as we have framed them.

Major CRAWFURD: These Amendments to the Schedule simply propose amended figures. They are not an attempt to get rid of the protective effect of these proposals, but they seek to return to the scale which was originally laid down by the right hon. Gentleman himself. Accordingly, if they are criticised on the ground that there is in them an attempt to give an advantage to the foreign manufacturer, that criticism applies to the original scale of the right hon. Gentleman. The Financial Secretary to the Treasury said that these proposals in the Schedule, as they are now, are acceptable to the Silk Association, but the Silk Association does not represent the whole of the interests involved. It does not even represent the majority of the interests involved, and I should like to know from the Financial Secretary if the proposals which he says are now fixed and final, are acceptable to the merchants, traders and exporters. Are they acceptable, for instance, to the silk section of the London Chamber of Commerce. If these figures, having been accepted by a certain section of the interests involved, are now regarded as final, what becomes of the statement just made that further consideration will be given to them before the Report stage?

Mr. GUINNESS: My right hon. Friend said we hoped to bring forward a new and reduced rate on noil tissue. That is the only case mentioned. As to the other question raised by the hon. Member, this Committee was a consultative Committee and all interests concerned in the silk trade were represented. The Chancellor of the Exchequer was simply concerned to
submit the various schemes under consideration to all the interests. Of course you will find individual traders who are not completely content but we believe the scale does substantial justice in view of the complicated nature of the subject.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move in page 18, line 28, column 1, to leave out the words "containing silk ".
This is merely a drafting Amendment to make clear the manner of computing the duty and to make clear that these rates apply to the poundage of goods made and not to the silk content, in each of the lines of the Schedule.

Captain BENN: I am proud to find my name associated with that of the Chancellor of the Exchequer as sponsoring an Amendment. But, on examining this Amendment this morning, I came to the conclusion that it was one that I ought not to move, and so I make a present to the Chancellor of the Exchequer of the dialectical point, if he cares to have it, that I am proposing to resist an Amendment which actually stands in my name on the Paper. I may be wrong about the interpretation of this Amendment, and I will ask the right hon. Gentleman, or the hon. Member for Macclesfield (Mr. Remer), or some other expert to tell me whether or not the danger that I foresee is a real one. We are dealing with the rate of duty on silk tissues. It is charged on the weight, not on the yard, and the original proposal of the Government was to charge on the weight of real silk in the tissue. I am told that artificial silk is not really concerned in this point at all. There is a process, I am informed, called loading the silk; that is to say, the silk itself, which is very light and easily drawn out of shape, is treated with metal, generally tin, for the purpose of giving the silk a better hang in the frock and making it more solid. Ribbons, particularly, are treated in this way, I understand. Now, the Chancellor of the Exchequer says: "Instead of merely taxing the amount of silk in the tissue, I am going to tax the whole of the tissue; that is to say, I will weigh in the balances not merely the silk, which the House has, by passing the Ways and Means Resolution, authorised me to tax, but the tin in the tissue, and I am going to levy the same duty on the tin as on the silk."
If my interpretation of this is right, I would ask the Committee if it thinks the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is really acting with complete candour to the Committee when he says that this Amendment is merely a drafting Amendment, and when, in fact, it turns out that, whereas he was authorised originally to tax the silk in the tissue, he is now taking authority to tax the silk plus the tin. That is to say, he may be multiplying his duty from one of 33⅓ per cent. on the silk content to one of 100 per cent. or more on the silk content. I have consulted merchants in the trade, and they tell me that this a real difficulty. The Chancellor of the Exchequer has asked for duties on many things, and before the end of this Parliament he will have asked for duties on many more. Of that, I am confident. [HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear"]. We know that hon. Members opposite do not think the Safeguarding of Industries pledge has any binding force, but I think it is a surprise to learn that in this silk Clause there is power sought to tax tin, and yet I am told that that is really the effect of this Amendment. There is one further point I wish to raise in regard to the meaning of tissues, but I think perhaps the better place to raise it would be on line 39, where the Government are moving another Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move in page 18, lines 29 and 30, column 1, to leave out the words "for every pound of silk therein," and to insert instead thereof the words "the lb."
All this series of Amendments affects a highly technical and localised sphere. There are two principal ways in which the weight of an imported article of silk character may be increased. I am leaving out altogether the question of whether the silk is discharged or undischarged, whether the gum has been extracted from the products or not, and I come only to these two specialised forms of treating tissues which involve substantial additions to the weight. The first is this question of what is called loading; that is to say, that a silk tissue which contains a certain proportion of silk is weighted with some other substance, in some cases salts of tin, in order to give it a very heavy and sumptuous feel in the wear, and to add to the general attractiveness of the fabric,
while at the same time largely diminishing the cost to the producer. There is no doubt that after a certain point in this process is reached the loading falls very near the area of what is unceremoniously described as adulteration. For instance, in some cases the loading sometimes amounts to as much as 70 per cent. of the entire weight; 70 per cent of it is a loading of foreign matter. Fabrics that are heavily loaded with these non-fibrous elements cannot possess the constituency or the durability of the fabrics, whether of real or artificial silk, which are composed mainly of fibrous yarn. I cannot say that I approach the question of loading in an extremely sympathetic spirit; but if there is to be any loading of these fabrics upon any considerable scale, or marked degree, there is no reason why it should not be on this side of the Channel. We had a long discussion with the representatives of the silk trade as to whether the duty should be levied on the silk content, on the loaded article minus the loading or including the loading, and after a long discussion, in which I need hardly say, different opinions were expressed, it was the consensus of opinion that it would be far more in the interests of British trade that the duty should be levied on the total weight, including the loading. That means that if there is to be loading that loading will, in the main, be done in this country. Then there is the point of the development of the loading machinery. We were told that a very important firm had already the machinery to enable them to do the process of loading; therefore in regard to the adulterated part of the goods there will be no risk of failure of the supply to meet any possible demand. Therefore we decided that we would tax boldly and freely the silk tissues on full weight, including loading.
But that is only a portion of the subject. Side by side with this question of loading is the problem of filling. In India, China, and other places a lot of silk fabric is made up, and very often a good many extraneous elements are mixed with the silk content. Rice and flour and other ingredients are mixed with the silk fabric, and these all add to the weight, but have to be removed in the finishing process. There is a series of amendments charging the duty on the full weight of the silk so far as loading is concerned, and we propose to make allowance in particular cases in which these
products of a filling character are present. We make allowance for the home manufacturer who wishes to import filled products by excluding them from the full process of the duty, while in these heavy loaded products we propose to tax the silk upon the full weight. I have given a general indication of the policy we have pursued in order that this series of amendments may be discussed together. These are the two broad principles we have followed on the advice of the trade, and after sitting in conference with 10 or 15 representatives of different interests in the trade.

Captain BENN: May I ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the same principle is followed with regard to drawbacks as in regard to loading?

Mr. CHURCHILL: We cannot say that every aspect of the duty finds its correlation in the drawback. Some of the aspects of the duty have no connection with the products which are the subject of the drawback, but so far as there is any connection this has been harmonised and worked out in all cases.

Mr. RAMSAY MacDONALD: I am sorry that I cannot congratulate the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Benn) on his company to-night.

Captain BENN: I think the right hon. Gentleman was not in the House when I apologised for having put down the Amendment. There was a mistake, and I am opposing the Amendment moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Mr. MacDONALD: I heard the apology and the hon. and gallant Member will find that his mistake was not a small one, but a mistake of most serious and far-reaching consequence. The defence we have just heard is simple, naked and unashamed Protection. It is the worst instance we have had in all our debates of the breach of that pledge to which reference has so often been made, and as far as we are concerned we shall divide the Committee on the question.

Mr. J. JONES: I cannot pretend, of course, to be an expert on matters of this kind. I was not born with a loom in my hand. I was born with a shovel in my mouth. But what does the Chancellor of the Exchequer mean by loading? Some
of us have been filled, but so far as this particular loading is concerned I want to know where tin comes in? I have always understood that tin is a product of the British Empire. Is he going to tax tin? If so, although he is giving to some of our Colonies and protectorates preferences in tariffs, what he is going to give with one hand he is taking away with the other. I am not, of course, going to keep the House very long, I never do—I should like to keep hon. Members longer in another place—what I want is to have an explanation as to what the Chancellor of the Exchequer means by this sort of legislation. First he will, and then he will not. He gives something with one hand and takes it away with the other. It is a game of "put and take." We put and he takes. And since the Government had began this game of giving a preference this way and then that, of giving relief in this and that way, so long as you had a policy of that kind you are bound to find yourself in difficulties. We have spent a fortnight discussing the rival merits of various interests. I want to ask this House not to accept this proposition. We propose to go straight for what we believe to be the right thing; that the workers and this country should have more consideration, and not the people who think they represent the workers because they have been able to get here by accident.

Mr. MACKINDER: It has been very interesting to hear the explanation of the Chancellor of the Exchequer and the very shameless methods which have been adopted by manufacturers at home and abroad, and in India, of artificially weighting the materials that our people have to buy. These are the methods of adulteration carried out not only by the people abroad but by our own manufacturers abroad. It will be very interesting to the general public to find that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is cognisant of all these methods; and I hope they will take note of it.

Captain BENN: Can the Chancellor of the Exchequer tell me if any of this loading is done in this country? Is there any industry?

HON. MEMBERS: Yes.

Captain BENN: I am told there is not, at least to any considerable extent. Then
there is this second point. Do we understand that where silk is loaded up to 70 per cent. that the Chancellor of the Exchequer is imposing a duty upon it of 15s. 9d. per lb. weight? That is a point which should be understood by those who are going to vote for the proposal.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The figures are those in the Schedule, and there is nothing of the kind mentioned by the hon. and gallant Member in the Schedule. The hon. and gallant Member has argued that in the case of a tissue which is 70 per cent. loading and 30 per cent. silk that the silk would be charged at that rate. That may be so. We are definitely charging the duty on the weight of the silk tissue, including the loading. We have decided on that as a matter of policy. If it can be done in this country I am sure the loading will be done here. It is done now on a small scale and the machinery exists in some of the most important silk firms for undertaking this task on a larger scale. We have no doubt-that whatever is desirable in this matter will be done in this country. Arrangements are made which will prevent silk being loaded in this country for export in order to obtain an excessive drawback. It will not be to any person's advantage to load silk in this country for export in order to get the drawback of the higher rate.

Mr. VARLEY: Just to complete the picture of commercial morality, and seeing that he has given his benediction to adulteration, will the Chancellor of the Exchequer ensure that the customer knows what he is paying in tax for silk and what for filling?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I see no reason why that should not be made known. In the examination of such subjects as this a great many novel aspects come to light, but the customer who goes to buy a loaded silk article does not say to himself, or herself: "I wish to buy an article which is made of 30 per cent. silk and 70 per cent. loading, or '70 per cent. silk' and 30 per cent. loading." The customer says to herself: "This looks a very nice kind of stuff. I can make myself a nice dress out of it, and I will take it for what it looks like and what it is." At the same time, if you come to the ramifications of many businesses you find substitutes for expensive commodities are often intro-
duced in some quantity or another. Our tax discourages it.

Miss WILKINSON: Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that the first time that this silk is washed the filling disappears: therefore the customer is paying a tax on a commodity that disappears?

Mr. CHURCHILL: The fact of our decision to tax this adulterated import, which is apparently to some extent swept away in the wash will be to prevent a number of people being misled by apparent sheen into purchasing an article of no great durability.

Mr. SANDEMAN: I have not heard so much nonsense talked for a long time. You may take it that what really happens in buying a thing at a price is that that price is regulated by the amount of filling in goods which are not pure silk. If you want the finished goods you will have to fill them with as much as they will hold with safety. You have a very good example in cotton goods, in which Japan did a big trade with Australia. The goods were excellent until they began to think Australians were beginning to get a bit soft. The Japanese then sent down goods which the merchants shook and the filling fell out. You won't get that with Lancashire goods. Lancashire people know how much, with safety, they can put in the goods, and they put in that and get a good finish and a good result. We have heard the argument: why should tin put into the finish of silk goods pay tax? It is plain that if tin is put into goods we can put it in here. We can finish just as well as anyone on the Continent, and we do not want Continental stuff if we can keep British labour employed. There is no advantage to be got by sending tin out to France and bringing it back here.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: How about gin instead of tin?

Mr. SANDEMAN: No, that would be bad. I am informed that gin in cotton makes a stain.

Mr. HARRIS: It has been made quite clear that this is not to keep out adulterated goods, for the Chancellor of the Exchequer encourages Lancashire men to adulterate goods. It is nonsense to say this country does not adulterate cloth. A great deal of the calico comes out of Lancashire adulterated.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of Schedule."

Division No. 170.]
AYES.
[12.48 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (File, West)
Hayday, Arthur
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Stan., Cannock)
Hayes, John Henry
Rose, Frank H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cape, Thomas
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stephen, Campbell


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sutton, J. E.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Thorne, G. R. (Wolverhampton, E.)


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Varley, Frank B.


Duckworth, John
Kirkwood, D.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lawson, John James
Warne, G. H.


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Forrest, W.
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren Andrew
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gillett, George M.
Maxton. James
Welsh, J. C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Westwood, J.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Windsor, Walter


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.



Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES—


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben
Sir Godfrey Collins and Sir Robert




Hutchison.




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Haslam, Henry C.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hawke, John Anthony


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Crooke, J. Smedley (Deritend)
Headlam, Lieut. -Colonel C. M.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Davies, A, V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Day, Colonel Harry
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dixey, A. C.
Hilton, Cecil


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Drewe, C.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H
Eden, Captain Anthony
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Betterton, Henry B.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Blundell, F. N.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Boothby, R. J. G.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney. N.)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Everard, W. Lindsay
Huntingfield, Lord


Brass, Captain W.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Brassey, sir Leonard
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Fermoy, Lord
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Briscoe, Richard George
Fielden, E B.
Jacob, A. E.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Finburgh, S
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fleming D. P.
Lamb, J. Q.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Ford P. J.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Loder, J. de V.


Burman, J. B.
Fraser Captain Ian
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lumley, L. R.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Ganzoni, Sir John
Lynn, Sir R. J.


Campbell, E. T.
Gee, Captain R.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Macintyre, Ian


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Macmilian, Captain H.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A. (Birm., W).
Goff, Sir Park
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Chapman, Sir S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Charteris. Brigadier-General J.
Gretton, Colonel John
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Christie, J. A.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Margesson, Captain D.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Guinness Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Merriman, F. B.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Colfox, Major Wm. Philip
Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Cope, Major William
Hanbury, C.
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Harland, A.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. sir George L.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Neville, R. J.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hartington, Marquess of
Nicholson, O (Westminster)

The Committee divided: Ayes, 84; the Noes, 183.

Nuttall, Ellis
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Tinne, J. A.


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sassoon, sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Ward, Lt. -Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Penny, Frederick George
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Watts, Dr. T.


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Wells, S. R.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Shepperson, E. W.
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Pielou, D. P.
Skelton, A. N.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Pilcher, G.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Power, Sir John Cecil
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Radford, E. A.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Reid, Captain A. S. C. (Warrington)
Storry Deans, R.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Remer, J. R.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Wood, E.(Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Strickland, Sir Gerald
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Styles, Captain H. Walter



Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Captain Viscount Curzon and Lord Stanley.


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)



Sandeman, A. Stewart

Proposed words there inserted.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 18, line 31, column 1, to leave out the words "for every pound of silk therein," and to insert instead thereof the words "the lb."

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 81; Noes, 181.

Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Huntingfield, Lord
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Fermoy, Lord
Jacob, A. E.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Fielden, E. B.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Finburgh, S.
Lamb, J. Q.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Fleming, D. P.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Ford, P. J.
Loder, J. de V.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Shepperson, E. W.


Fraser, Captain Ian
Lumley, L. R.
Skelton, A. N.


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lynn, Sir R. J.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Ganzoni, Sir John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Gee, Captain R.
Macintyre, Ian
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. steel-
Storry Deans, R.


Goff, Sir Park
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Gower, Sir Robert
Margesson, Captain D.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Gretton, Colonel John
Merriman, F. B.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Grotrian, H. Brent
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Hammersley, S. S.
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Hanbury, C.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Tinne, J. A.


Harland, A.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Watts, Dr. T.


Hartington, Marquess of
Nuttall, Ellis
Wells, S. R.


Haslam, Henry C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Wheler, Major Sir Granville C. H.


Hawke, John Anthony
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Penny, Frederick George
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Heneage. Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Pielou, D. P.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Herbert, S. (York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Pilcher, G.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hilton, Cecil
Power, Sir John Cecil
Wood, E. (Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D.(St. Marylebone)
Radford, E. A.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)



Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Remer, J. R.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Captain Hacking and Major Cope.


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)

Proposed words there inserted.

Captain BENN: May I ask about the small Amendment which I have on the Paper, but do not propose to move. If necessary I will withdraw the Motion. It deals with the silk content. If the Chancellor will say that it will improve the categories in the Schedule and will receive consideration I should be grateful and quite content. Perhaps I should formally move. After line 32, to insert the words:
If the silk content is spun silk only, for every pound of such silk—5s. 8d.

Mr. GUINNESS: I think the hon. and gallant Member might give us some explanation as to how he thinks this may improve the Schedule.

Captain BENN: On a point of Order. I submit this Amendment—I put it down at the desire of the Silk Section of the London Chamber of Commerce. I respectfully urge that it should be formally moved.

The CHAIRMAN: I have seen the Amendment and heard the explanation
given and I have altered my mind. I do not select the Amendment.

Miss WILKINSON: I beg to move, in page 18, to leave out lines 33 to 41, inclusive.
I do not want to delay the Committee with another Speech on the question but I do want to point out that the result of the Amendment which I have would be to exclude artificial silk altogether from the purposes of this tax. I feel that the more one goes into the tax the more one realises the endless complications that are going to pursue when you try to put these taxes in operation. However much the Chancellor tries to meet our position, as he has attempted to meet the position I raised earlier in debate, he will only find that step by step he gets into a worse muddle. I suggest that this artificial silk, which is one of the cheapest fabrics, should be excluded from the tax. That is the only way of putting this matter right. I, therefore, move the Amendment which stands in my name.

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member appreciates that we are dealing with the Customs Duty.

Miss WILKINSON: I am sorry. There are technical details. I want to bring up that point to leave out these articles.

Mr. GUINNESS: Clause 4 of the Bill, which this Schedule carries out, was thoroughly discussed in Committee, and it was decided that

Division No. 172.]
AYES.
[1.10 a.m.


Acland-Troyte. Lieut.-Colonel
Finburgh, S.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Fleming, D. P.
Neville, R. J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Ford, P. J.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Nuttall, Ellis


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gee, Captain R.
Penny, Frederick George


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Pielou, D. P.


Betterton, Henry B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Pilcher, G.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Gretton, Colonel John
Power, Sir John Cecil


Blundell, F. N.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Boothby, R. J. G.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Radford, E. A.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Gunston, Captain D. w.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Brass, Captain W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Remer, J. R.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hammersloy, s. S.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hanbury, C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Briscoe, Richard George
Harland, A.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harrison, G. J. C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hartington, Marquess of
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Haslam, Henry C.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hawke, John Anthony
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Burman, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Campbell, E. T.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hennessy. Major J. R. G.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth. S.)
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hilton, Cecil
Shepperson, E. w.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. J. A.(Birm., W.)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Skelton, A. N.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Christie, J. A.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden. E.)


Cobb. Sir Cyril
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Storry Deans, R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Huntingfield, Lord
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Cope, Major William
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Jacob, A. E.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Lamb, J. O.
Tinne, J. A.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Ward, Lt.-Col. A.L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Loder, J. de V.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dalkeith, Earl of
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Watts, Dr. T.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Lumley, L. R.
Wells, S. R.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Wheler, Major Sir- Granville C. H.


Dixey, A. C.
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Macintyre, Ian
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Drewe, C
Macmillan, Captain H.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Eden, Captain Anthony
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Wise, Sir Fredric


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Margesson, Captain D.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Merriman, F. B.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Colonel Gibbs and Mr. Frederick


Fermoy, Lord
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Thomson.


Fielden, E. B.






NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Broad. F. A.
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Buchanan, G.
Crawfurd, H. E.


Ammon, Charles George
Cape, Thomas
Dalton, Hugh


Barr, J.
Charleton, H. C.
Day, Colonel Harry

artificial silk should be made liable. I am afraid we cannot go back on a system already agreed upon.

Question put, "That lines 33 to 38, stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 180; Noes, 82.

Duckworth, John
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sitch, Charles H.


Fenby, T. D.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Gibbins, Joseph
Kelly, W. T.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Gillett, George M.
Kirkwood, D.
Stamford, T. W.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Lawson, John James
Stephen, Campbell


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Sutton, J. E.


Grundy, T. W.
Mackinder, W.
Tinker, John Joseph


Hall, F. (York, W. R-, Normanton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Varley, Frank B.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Maxton, James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Morris, R. H.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hardie, George D.
Murnin, H.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Harris, Percy A.
Oliver, George Harold
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Palin, John Henry
Welsh, J C.


Hayday, Arthur
Paling, W.
Westwood, J.


Hayes, John Henry
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Potts, John S.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hirst, G. H.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Riley, Ben
Windsor, Walter


Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)



Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Rose, Frank H.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Scurr, John
Mr. Thomas Kennedy and Mr. Warne.


Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, in page 18, lines 39 to 41, column 1, to leave out the words "containing artificial silk, for every pound of artificial silk therein" and to insert instead thereof the words "the lb."

Mr. P. HARRIS: I think we are entitled to an explanation. When the Amendment was moved to real silk we were led to suppose that it was purely a drafting Amendment, but an innocent little Amendment was moved without any explanation which was shown to be of great importance. On the one hand it brings into existence a great new industry of making silk; on the other hand we were told it was going to destroy a wicked attempt to defraud the public by palming off on them silk that was not silk at all but a mixture of lace and silk. I am informed that artificial silk does not lend itself in the same way to absorb this owing to its peculiar nature manufactured either from wood pulp or cotton waste. I do think, when for the first time for 50 years, a new tax has been introduced, the Financial Secretary to the Treasury is responsible first to understand the tax and then to explain it to the Committee.

Mr. GUINNESS: This Amendment is put in merely as a drafting Amendment for the sake of making the Clause clear. The effect will be that instead as under

Division No. 173.]
AYES.
[1.25 a.m,


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.


Agg-Gardner, Rt. Hon. Sir James T.
Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Brass, Captain W.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Centr'l)
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Brassey, Sir Leonard


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Betterton, Henry B.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Briscoe Richard George


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Blundell, F. N.
Brittain, Sir Harry


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Boothby, R. J. G.
Brocklebank C. E. R.

the Schedule charging 3s. 6d. per pound on the tissues containing artificial silk we redrafted it and put it so much per pound. If hon. Members will look at page 910 of the Order Paper, they will see that in Schedule 2, page 21, after line 2, it is proposed to insert the words
In calculating for the purpose of any duty or drawback the weight of any yarn or tissue the weight of any fibres other than silk or artificial silk or of any waterproofing materials in the yarn or tissue shall be excluded.

That has reference to this particular part of the Schedule, and the hon. Member for South-West Bethnal Green (Mr. Harris) will appreciate that his fears are groundless, because cotton fibres will be expressly excluded by this further Amendment which we shall shortly move. The result of this is that you will exclude all kinds, throughout this Schedule, where they are other than silk fibres, and you will leave in the tax on the loading and upon which both sides of the Committee are agreed.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule," put, and negatived.

Question put, "That the words 'the lb.' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 177; Noes, 82.

Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Penny, Frederick George


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Burman, J. B.
Hammersley, S. S.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hanbury, C.
Pielou, D. P.


Campbell, E. T.
Harland, A.
Pilcher, G.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Harrison, G. J. C.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hartington, Marquess of
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Haslam, Henry C.
Radford, E. A.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hawke, John Anthony
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Remer, J. R.


Christie, J. A.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Herbert, S. (York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hilton, Cecil
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Huntingfield, Lord
Shepperson, E. W.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Skelton, A. N.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Dixey, A. C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Jacob, A. E.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Drewe, C.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lamb, J. Q.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Storry Deans, R.


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Loder, J. de V.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lumley, L. R.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macintyre, Ian
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Fermoy, Lord
Macmillan, Captain H.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Fielden, E. B.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Tinne, J. A.


Finburgh, S.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Ward, Lt. -Col. A. L. (Kingston-on-Hull)


Fleming, D. P.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Ford, P. J.
Margesson, Captain D.
Watts, Dr. T.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Merriman, F. B.
Wells, S. R.


Fraser, Captain Ian
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Colonel J.C. T.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Gee, Captain R.
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wise, Sir Fredric


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Neville, R. J.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Goff, Sir Park
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Gower, Sir Robert
Nuttall, Ellis



Gretton, Colonel John
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Grotrian, H. Brent
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Capt. Hacking and Major Cope.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hayes, John Henry
Rose, Frank H.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, G. H.
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Barr, J.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stamford, T. W.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stephen, Campbell


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sutton, J. E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Tinker, John Joseph


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Varley, Frank B.


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Day, Colonel Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Warne, G. H.


Duckworth, John
Lawson, John James
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J.R.(Aberavon)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Welsh, J. C.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Westwood, J.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Wilson, Sir C. H. (Leeds, Central)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Windsor, Walter


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Hardle, George D.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Harris, Percy A.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sir Godfrey Collins and Sir Robert


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben
Hutchison.


Hayday, Arthur
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)

The CHAIRMAN: With regard to the Amendment of the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Captain Benn), in page 19, line 4, at the end, to insert



s.
d.


"For every pound of silk contained therein
7
9


For every pound of artificial silk contained therein
3
6."


it is an Amendment of substance, but I do not think that as it stands it will read. I take it that the hon. and gallant Member means to leave out the whole of the paragraph and substitute these words?

Captain BENN: There is a consequential Amendment on the Paper to leave out the rest of the paragraph so that it makes a cohesive whole.

The CHAIRMAN: I do not think it matters much either way.

Sir R. HAMILTON: rose—

The CHAIRMAN: Does the hon. and gallant Gentleman (Captain Benn) not wish to move his Amendment?

Captain BENN: I would have preferred my hon. Friend (Sir E. Hamilton) to move this Amendment, but if I am to lose my right I will move it, and my hon. Friend can speak later. I beg to move, in page 19, line 4, at the end, to insert



s.
d.


"For every pound of silk contained therein
7
9


For every pound of artificial silk contained therein
3
6"


You, Sir, have been good enough to say that it is an Amendment of some substance, and I suggest to the Committee that there has been some point of relevancy in every Amendment that has been moved. No Amendment of a purely dialectical kind has been put forward. This Amendment touches a very big issue in the Bill, and I propose to lay before the Committee some of the grounds of our objection to it. The first proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was to tax silk. In the Budget speech, which we remember so well, he said that he found in silk a vehicle for carrying a great part of the public burdens and public expenditure, and we understood from that speech that we were giving him permission to tax silk. But as we proceed with these Schedules we find that under the cover of this tax on silk he is taxing all sorts of other things. He is putting a
tax of 5s. 3d. per pound on tin imported in a certain form into this country. The tax on silk has become a tax on tin. Under this part of the Bill we are taxing a vast variety of articles. The first proposal of the Chancellor of the Exchequer was this, that whereas in the case of tissues and yarns he was taxing silk itself, and imposing a tax on the weight of the silk, when it came to articles wholly or mainly made of artificial silk, any article which had a trace or scintilla of artificial silk he altered the scale of his duties, and instead of proposing a duty on the weight of the silk which he could easily have done and which he was authorised to do by the Budget speech, he imposes a duty on the whole article. If his lynx-eyed officials have detected the least bit of silk in an article then the Chancellor says you must pay 33⅓ per cent. duty on the total value of the whole article because of the crime of silk being found on the premises. That was the first proposal in the well thought out Budget which balanced things and which no doubt was the result of anxious thought for many months before. That proposal was so fantastic that it did not survive two days' public examination. Just think what that meant. It meant that an article, say a motor-car in which there was found anything in the nature of silk would have to pay a duty of 33⅓ per cent. on the total value of the car if imported into this country. I do not know much about the price of cars. When a man imports a motor-car—

The CHAIRMAN: There is no such proposal in the Bill. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is talking about the original resolution; it has not materialised in the Bill.

Captain BENN: The earlier proposal was simple, although it was fantastic. It could be dealt with shortly; the proposal in the Bill is divided into three heads and it is necessary to deal with them in three different sections of my speech. We will take lines 5 to 9 first. It is under this that my remarks about motor-cars fall. The proposal is that an article being found to contain some silk is to be dutiable to the extent of one-third of the cost. The tax might be 10,000 or 20,000 per cent. the value of the silk, the duty being levied upon the total value of the article to which the silk is attached. If the motor-car of which I am speaking had
lamps with electric wire insulated by silk—[Interruption]. I have an example of copper wire so insulated.

The CHAIRMAN: The value of the wound wire is not the value of the car.

Captain BENN: I do not understand the point of Order. I invite you to read the Proposition—
Where the value of the silk … does not exceed five per cent—

The CHAIRMAN: I thought the hon. and gallant Gentleman began with the first paragraph.

Captain BENN: I understand the complaint is that I was proceeding too fast. I have rather anticipated what I had to say later on. Of course the motor car example, which was brought under No. 3, was an exaggerated example, but not an impossible example. I have heard from traders who have to deal with customers. It is the regulations they dislike and the forms which are imposed upon them by officials who simply go by the letter of the Act and have not a great deal of consideration. They do their best, but they are governed by regulations and cannot be as considerate and helpful as they would wish to be. I do not pursue it as a reductio ad absurdum. If the motor car is worth £2,000 and the silk on the electric wire is worth 1s. (that is less than 5 per cent. of the value of the article) under this Schedule it is to be taxable at an amount equal to 2 per cent. of the value of the article. The tax would be £40.

Mr. CHURCHILL: A motor car under the McKenna Duties, which was a foreign import, would be charged a duty of 33⅓ per cent. and, in respect of the silk content, it would be charged at the rate of 2 per cent. But by the principle we are following the duty of 2 per cent. Would be swamped in the other duty of 33⅓ per cent. and this duty on the silk content would have no more relation to the price the consumer would have to pay than the speech of the hon. and gallant Member has to any practical effect.

Captain BENN: The Chancellor of the Exchequer has raised an interesting point. After all, it is no joke to traders that these tariffs should be imposed upon them. I took the case of a motor car dutiable under Section 3, and where does
one find that it shall not be doubly dutiable as well.

Mr. GUINNESS: The hon. and gallant Gentleman cannot have read the rest of the Bill. Under Part III., paragraph 2, he will find the answer.

Captain BENN: I think I am mistaken and that the Financial Secretary is right. He directs my attention to the new provision under Paragraph 2. That is so, I was quite wrong.

Mr. ERSKINE: On a point of Order. Would it not be better for the hon. and gallant Gentleman first to make himself conversant with what is in the Bill?

The CHAIRMAN: I think I could hardly enforce as a rule of Order that no Member should speak unless conversant with the subject.

Captain BENN: No doubt if I transgress the rules of Order I shall be promptly called upon to conform. I apologise to the Chancellor of the Exchequer in the case of the McKenna Duties. He has put in a provision to provide against double duty. Let me take the case of clothing or shoes, or I will take the case of the making-up trade. The effect of this is that if they import an article which has silk in it they do not pay the ordinary tax on silk but a percentage on the whole value of the article. They have to pay on a number of other things which are attached to the form of the article. I will give the right hon. Gentleman an example of silk-covered copper wire. Eight pounds of silk wound on copper wire would have to pay not 40s. as it would have to do if it came in unused for this purpose, but 340s. That is one illustration. There are a great many others to show how, when you start levying a Duty on the total value of the article instead of on the silk content, you put yourself into considerable difficulty. This side of the question is one of the most difficult, for the reasons I have stated. It does affect a great many trades and a great many people who are importing made-up articles with a small silk content. Fancy goods and many trades are concerned. It presents great difficulty, and I do not understand why the Chancellor of the Exchequer has not decided to tax the made-up article on the silk content and why he should insist on the tax being levied on the total value of the article. If he is doing it because he wants to
make the tax protective in a general sort of way—protecting the hosiery trade or the chocolate box trade or the copper wire trade or everything else that can be brought in—it is a sound argument which can be understood, but it is not a silk tax. It is Protection introduced by the back door. Although later on we shall have something to say about the change which the Chancellor is making himself by an Amendment on the rates, I leave that for the time being and merely direct attention to the very heavy rate of Duty that is imposed on silk, because of the taxing of silk, if it comes in the form of a made-up article, not on the silk content, but on the total value of the article of which it forms part.

Sir HENRY SLESSER: I do not think I can be blamed for having spoken much in these Debates, but I do think this is a point of considerable substance. I want to suggest to the Chancellor of the Exchequer or the Financial Secretary to the Treasury that there really must be some minimum at which point the amount of artificial silk or real silk in the commodity becomes so small that there should be no tax on the article. As I read the Schedule which the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Benn) has just referred to, although artificial silk might be one or even a half or a quarter per cent. of the total value of the article, an amount equal to two per cent, of the value of the article would be imposed, so that you actually might get a smaller percentage of artificial silk in the commodity than the amount of duty. I suggest, therefore, that there should be some minimum, even if it is only one per cent., at which it is said that the amount of silk is so small that it is absurd to tax it as an artificial silk article at all. You have declining degrees of artificial silk, but instead of the last column coming down to a minimum of artificial silk it comes down to nothing at all. The first thing is "exceeding 20 per cent.," the second "exceeding 5 per cent.," and the third "does not exceed 5 per cent." which might be so small as to be a thousandth part of the whole. It really becomes nonsense to say that if a person picks up one thread of artificial silk in a large article, that that article shall be
taxed two per cent. I do ask the right hon. Gentleman to consider whether there should not be some minimum below which a mere fragment of artificial silk should not subject the article to taxation. It is not in the interests of anybody that the Customs authorities can pick out a sixteenth, a hundredth or a thousandth part of artificial silk in an article and say that the whole article shall be subject to the two per cent. tax. Apart from anything else, you will have endless litigation on this matter. People will say the artificial silk is so small that it cannot be said to be a part of the article at all. Other people will say it is part of the article, and you will have endless disputes of that sort. No advocate of the tax, I think, would not be prepared to say that there must not be some minimum limit below which the placing of artificial silk into the article should exempt the article from duty. There is no relation between the amount of duty and the article when you fall below five per cent. It is really absurd, and I do appeal to have this matter reconsidered.

Mr. GUINNESS: The object of the hon. and gallant Member for Leith (Captain Benn), although he did not really deal with that side of it in detail, is to substitute a specific rate of duty on made-up goods for the ad valorem rate which is proposed in the Bill.

Captain BENN: Yes, on the silk.

2.0 A.M.

Mr. GUINNESS: At first sight that seems to be an attractive simplification, but if he will consider the matter more closely he will find that his proposal is absolutely unworkable, because most of these made-up goods would be destroyed if they were subject to the weight test of their silk content. It is possible to get a rough-and-ready idea of the value of the silk content as compared with the value of the rest of the materials, but when you charge your duty by weight you would find it absolutely impossible to deal with the import of made-up articles. Are you going to take the silk off the umbrella to weigh it separately from the frame and the stick? Are you going to tear the lining out of a felt hat and weigh that. Remember, too, that, if you do that, you get into the difficulty of charging an infinitesimal rate on the expensive made-up goods in proportion to their silk content when you compare it with the heavier
rates on the articles of a lower price. The objection to the particular figure which the hon. Member has mentioned—the same figure as for tissue—is that it would be extremely unfair to the British producer, because the British producer has to use dutiable material, and in working up these materials he necessarily is faced by a considerable amount of loss or waste. The foreigner would have an overwhelming advantage if he could bring his silk product in here and not be charged. The British producer ought to take account not only of the silk in the article but the silk which, in the process of manufacture, was lost. The hon. Member for South-East Leeds (Sir H. Slesser) suggested that there should be a minimum rate. It would be very unfair to the British producer if he were not able to get the same advantage. However little silk he had in his goods it would be liable to duty. But I do not think that

Division No. 174.]
AYES.
[2.5 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hayes, John Henry
Robinson, W.C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Buchanan, G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Cape, Thomas
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, Henry Haydn, (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Duckworth, John
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Fenby, T. D.
Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gillett, George M.
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grundy, T. W.
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hardie, George D.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Harris, Percy A.
Potts, John S.
Sir Godfrey Collins and Sir R.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Hutchison.




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Brass, Captain W.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.


Alexander, Sir Win. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Christie, J. A.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Briscoe, Richard George
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Brittain, Sir Harry
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Barnett, Major Sir Richard W.
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Cope, Major William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Burman, J. B.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.


Betterton, Henry B.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Campbell, E. T.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)


Blundell, F. N.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Boothby, R. J. G.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Chapman, Sir S.
Curzon, Captain Viscount

these extreme cases will arise. I believe that a specific duty, where the matter is examined in detail, will be found to be absolutely unworkable.

Sir R. HAMILTON: Let me give one instance of how the tax will work out. A dress is made of the value of 21 guineas, and there is five guineas' worth of silk. The value of the silk and the dress is 51 guineas. The duty on that is 33⅓ per cent. Seven guineas on five guineas' worth of silk. It is not a tax on silk, but on the garment. What is going to be the effect on the garment trade? When once you begin to interfere with a tax of this sort the difficulty is to see where it will end. One thing is perfectly obvious—the garment trade in this country is going to be affected very seriously indeed.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

The Committee divided Ayes, 80; Noes, 174.

Dalkeith, Earl of
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. Q.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Remer, J. R.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Holbrook, sir Arthur Richard
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Dixey, A. C.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Drewe, C.
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Huntingfield, Lord
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & p'bl's)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Jacob, A. E.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Shaw, Lt. -Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew. W)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lamb, J. Q.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Fermoy, Lord
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Shepperson, E. W.


Fielden, E. B.
Loder, J. de V.
Skelton, A. N.


Finburgh, S.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Fleming, D. P.
Lumley, L. R.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Ford, P. J.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Macintyre, Ian
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Storry Deans, R.


Ganzoni, Sir John
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Gee, Captain R.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Manningham-Buller, sir Mervyn
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Merriman, F. B.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Goff, Sir Park
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Gower, Sir Robert
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Tinne, J. A.


Grotrian, H. Brent
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Ward, Lt.-Col. A. L.(Kingston-on-Hull)


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Neville, R. J.
Watts, Dr. T.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wells, S. R.


Hammersley, S. S.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Hanbury, C.
Nuttall, Ellis
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Harland, A.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Harrison, G. J. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hartington, Marquess of
Penny, Frederick George
Wise, Sir Fredric


Haslam, Henry C.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hawke, John Anthony
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wood, E.(Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Pielou, D. P.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Pilcher, G.



Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Power, Sir John Cecil
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Radford, E. A.
Margesson.


Hilton, Cecil

Mr. GILLETT: I beg to move, in page 19, lines 6 and 7, column 2, to leave out the words "thirty-three and one-third," and to insert instead thereof the word "ten."

Mr. MACKINDER: On a point of Order, Mr. Deputy Chairman, has it not been the custom, when dealing with these Amendments, to take them in sections as you have done previously? I notice you have taken silk raw, yarn, artificial silk and then the things which are sectionalised so as to leave out lines from 5 to 13. May I have your ruling as to whether that has not been the method adopted?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN (Captain FitzRoy): That has been the method adopted, but the whole question should have been raised to the Amendment made. If the hon. Member wishes to speak on this question I shall allow him to do it on this Amendment.

Mr. MACKINDER: In the first item the reference is not only to silk tissues, but to silk which may be included in any article imported into this country, say, in the way of ladies' handbags.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The question arises on this Amendment.

Mr. GILLETT: The object of my Amendment, which is the first of a series, deals with the articles made wholly or in part of silk or artificial silk. I fully realise the object of the Chancellor of taking revenue but to a considerable extent it would not be fulfilled. All our desire is that any temptation to continue these duties may be to a certain extent taken away. The chief point which really underlies our proposals is our objection to the principle involved in the Customs duties on articles made only from silk and I should like to point out, in the first place, that in connection with silk there is a matter that is not sufficiently appreciated and that is that it is bound to have an effect on other countries and it is especially unfortunate in the case of silk that the countries affected are nations very intimately connected with us in the last war. However, that is one of the effects of any protective tariff and it is especially noticeable in this case. The
second reason is that I think that this is a step backward. We have seen some of the Continental empires divided up into smaller countries which have started on Protection tariffs to prevent the free flow of trade. We are simply following a policy which has been condemned in many quarters. To investigate all the articles which may have any silk in them beyond a certain percentage would involve a needless amount of work, and would impose a burden upon trade. That is really the underlying principle of these proposals. That is certainly the object I have in view in opposing them.

Mr. R. RICHARDSON: I wish to draw the attention of the Committee to the unfair incidence that the whole of this part of Schedule 2 involves. By the incidence of this Schedule you are going on increasing that taxation on those less able to bear it because they cannot afford to buy pure silk. You take an article that has 20 per cent. of silk in it. Immediately you increase the duty from 33⅓ per cent. to no less than 166⅔ per cent. on the silk contained in the article. Some of us working people have daughters—and some of them good looking—and we are anxious to make them appear respectable. It will not be possible if this taxation, this increase in the cost of living, is to be put on the shoulders of the workers and it is going to cause a great deal of trouble for the Government. I am fairly convinced that the Chancellor of the Exchequer has gone out to create for himself a large amount of trouble and the Chancellor of the Exchequer will be well advised to withdraw this duty. It cannot be worked; he must know that. If he has made a mistake let him be man enough to own up now. It is absolutely impossible.

Mr. HARRIS: This is a very excellent Amendment. This 33⅓ per cent. duty is equivalent to a protective tariff of a very high order. Very few countries go in for a duty on this scale. I was particularly interested in the example the Financial Secretary to the Treasury gave of the umbrella. It was the best illustration of the impossibility of carrying out the scheme of drawbacks. The great point the Chancellor of the Exchequer made with reference to a motor car, on second consideration, proved to be not a very exact one, because although it might apply to the ordinary private car which will be covered by the McKenna Duties,
it seemed to be forgotten that heavy cars and omnibuses do not come under the category of the McKenna Duties. I can give the Financial Secretary a great number of other instances. There is the case of shoes with silk linings or the shoes with the silk tops. There is the hat brought in from Italy. Thousands of cheap felt hats come from Italy which have not only silk linings but silk bands round the hats. These will be subject to the five per cent. duty. It will not affect the rich people. The rich people have a habit of going abroad both for the winter and the summer, and on their way they can go to Paris. They will be able to escape the duties levied by this Government on silk and will be able to buy not only one dress but two dresses. But the working women who want a little silk will have to pay a tax of 33⅓ per cent. If the Financial Secretary wants to get this Schedule tonight let him accept this Amendment.

Mr. GUINNESS: This Amendment is one of a series designed to cover the percentage payable under the ad valorem scale and to reduce the range on which each case of the percentage applies. This, for instance, reduces the percentage of 33⅓ per cent. It would be entirely inconsistent with Part I of Schedule 2 which we have already passed because it would mean that many of these goods imported made up, and therefore subject to ad valorem, duty, would pay less for the silk components than the corresponding rates of specific duty. Where would that land the home producer? It would mean that he with his duty-paid articles would have to compete with articles which had come in at a lower rate. It would absolutely destroy our making-up trade in this country. The hon. Member for Houghton-le-Spring (Mr. Richardson) mentioned a possible hardship it might inflict on girls of the working classes who might find their opportunities for adornment decreasing. I do not think that arises under this part of the Schedule at all. They do not buy imported articles made up of silk.

Miss WILKINSON: They buy large quantities of these articles that are imported—bourrette, for instance.

Mr. GUINNESS: That is not a made-up article. If we accepted this Amendment we should be putting a heavier tax on articles of a more reasonable price and allowing these expensive dresses to
come in at a lower figure than they can be made by the manufacturer here. That would be to the disadvantage of the poorer classes of the community as compared with those who can afford these expensive articles.

Mr. WALLHEAD: There is one phase of taxation which I have not heard discussed yet. I am one of those who believe that in proportion to their income the poorer people of this country are taxed more than any other section. They are taxed, not only so far as quantity is concerned, they are also taxed badly in regard to values, because these ad valorem duties impose a tax on quantities rather than on values. A good illustration is the case of tea. The man who is rich can get the choicest brands by paying the same tax as the man who has to be content with the sweepings of the warehouse. I believe this tax is going to hit the poorer section of the community. The illustrations that have been given have proved the entire foolishness of the whole thing, and if the Government were wise, and wished to avoid a great deal of trouble in the future, they would drop the tax entirely.

Mr. HARDIE: I should like to say one word on this subject. Articles coming in from America may contain what we call artificial silk, but what in America is not called artificial silk. How are you going to determine what is artificial silk which comes here in the lining of hats and on umbrellas? And unless you take off the cover of the umbrella how are you to judge the whole weight of this so-called artificial silk? What is your scientific method of determining whether an article contains 1 per cent. or 5 per cent. of artificial silk? How are you going to determine the silk contents of the lining of an ordinary bag?

Mr. GUINNESS: By value, not by weight.

Mr. HARDIE: Exactly; and now we have the explanation which brings me to what I wanted to say. You are not going to tax silk at all. The hon. and gallant Member has admitted that he is not going to tax the umbrella or bag, but its value. That is the whole defect in the proposal. We have not yet had a definition of artificial silk—and we are going to tax values.
For the first time in the history of British Budgets we are going to tax a name, not an article. You say that you are not going to determine what is in the handbag, but that you are going to tax its Value. Some hon. Members have tried to give a definition of artificial silk, and they have said that certain elements have to be extracted and again solidified. But it really does not matter what you are going to do. Men are constantly working upon these things and we are going to have an article produced very different from what is now called artificial silk. I know a gentleman who has produced from glass an article which it is very difficult for those in the silk trade to distinguish from pure silk. He does not call the product artificial silk. He calls it something else. We are told that there is to be a Commission to determine whether a thing is to be called artificial silk or not. You are not taxing an article at all; you are taxiing a name. Up to now we have always taxed something tangible. If you are going to have something which may have five or a dozen basic raw materials, then you are bound to confess you are taxiing a name. I would like the Financial Secretary to tell us what he defines as artificial silk.

Mr. MACKINDER: I was interested to hear the Financial Secretary state they would determine by value the tax on a lady's handbag or umbrella. The lining of the handbag, or the covering of the umbrella, may contain three or five per cent. of silk. It is totally impossible for the Financial Secretary, or anybody else, to determine the amount of silk in the cloth unless it has gone through an analysis. There is a rather significant feature about the Clause we are discussing. If the Chancellor will look at the Bill, he will see what, to my mind, is a clear case of anomaly. If he will look at the bottom paragraph he will see that where the volume of silk, or artificial silk, does not exceed five per cent. of the value of the article it is taxed 2 per cent. That is to say, a material with four per cent. will be faxed one-half the value, which is two per cent. If the material contains 19 per cent. it will be valued at 10 per cent. In the first paragraph the values are changed entirely and, if it contains 21 per cent. silk, it will be taxed 33⅓ per cent. I would like the Financial
Secretary to go into these figures. They are a complete anomaly as one goes down the list. The 21 per cent. silk in the material will be taxed 33⅓ per cent., the 19 per cent. will be taxed 10 per cent., and the four per cent. will be taxed two per cent. There is no relationship in these figures. They should be gone into by the Treasury before the Report stage.

Mr. DUNCAN GRAHAM: As a non-expert, I would like to know from the Chancellor of the Exchequer what are the answers to the questions which have been put by my two hon. Friends. I think my hon. Friend for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) put a few questions to which we are entitled to have an answer, particularly when there are so many experts on this particular question on the other side of the House who are evidently interested in the development of the argument which has taken place during the last half-hour or so. We are not animated by a desire to carry on discussion, or carry on the business to any reasonable length.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I apologise for being absent. Being absent, I do not gather the exact nature of the two questions the hon. Member wished me to answer.

Mr. MACKINDER: May I put one of them to the Chancellor of the Exchequer? In paragraph 3 it states that where silk exceeds 20 per cent. of the value of the article there will be a duty of 33⅓ per cent. The next paragraph reverses the position entirely. If it is 19 per cent., it is only taxed 10 per cent. The values are changed.

Mr. CHURCHILL: All this may be summed up in the repetition of the sombre but inevitable truth that governs so much of our mundane affairs: We must draw the line somewhere.

Mr. HARRIS: If a lady goes to Paris and buys a dress but does not wear it—[Interruption].

Mr. CHURCHILL: If they do not wear clothes, they will come under other classes of our legislation.

Mr. HARDIE: I want an answer from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. I am sure he enjoys an all-night sitting. In his absence the Financial Secretary made a certain statement.

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: This matter has been debated already.

Mr. HARDIE: My hon. Friend rose and put the point that a certain question had been put in the Chancellor of the Exchequer's absence, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer said he would like to have this question repeated. I have risen to ask how the silk percentage is to be determined in the case of 1,000 handbags that came in with silk linings. I was told that the tax was levied on the value of the article. Are we taxing the article, or are we taxing the name of an article?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has not the right to make the same speech twice.

Mr. HARDIE: I am not making a speech: I am stating a question, and I want the Chancellor of the Exchequer to tell me what he has in his mind as a definition of artificial silk. I want to know what is to be his definition? I pointed out how every day someone was making what was called artificial silk from entirely different basic materials, and I am contending that you are putting a duty on a name and not on an article.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Broadly speaking, our definition of artificial silk has followed the same line as that of the United States of America. Artificial silk is artificial silk, by whatever name known and by whatever process manufactured.

Mr. HARDIE: That admits my point that we are taxing a name and not an article. Are you aware that this is the first time in the history of British Budgets that a Chancellor of the Exchequer has ever put a tax on a name and not on an article?

Mr. CHURCHILL: If we pursue this we shall get into the region of metaphysics. The hon. Member does not distinguish between perfectly well-known objects and their expression in terms of human speech. Every Chancellor, in all times, has taxed articles and has taxed them by name.

Mr. HARDIE: But now you are trying to tax a name without being able to define the article. It is breaking every precedent to try to put a duty on a name.

Mr. ERSKINE: On a point of Order. I have taken the trouble to take a note of what the hon. Member has said, and this is—

Mr. KIRKWOOD: I demand of him to produce the notes.

Mr. ERSKINE: I have taken a special note of the remarks of the hon. Gentleman, and he has made the same remark four times to my certain knowledge.

Division No. 175.]
AYES.
[2.55 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Neville, R. J.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Applin, colonel R. V. K.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Gee, Captain R.
Nuttall, Ellis


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barnett, Major Sir R. W.
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Penny, Frederick George


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Betterton, Henry B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Pielou, D. P.


Blundell, F. N.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Pilcher, G.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Brass, Captain W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hammersley, S. S.
Radford, E. A.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hanbury, C.
Reid, Captain A. S. C. (Warrington)


Briscoe, Richard George
Harland, A.
Remer, J. R.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harrison, G. J. C.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hartington, Marquess of
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Haslam, Henry C.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hawke, John Anthony
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Burman, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Campbell, E. T.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hilton, Cecil
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew, W)


Christie, J. A.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Shepperson, E. W.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Huntingfield, Lord
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Storry Deans, R.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Jacob, A. E.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lamb, J. Q.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Dean, A. W.
Loder, J. de V.
Tinne, J. A.


Dixey, A. C.
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harmon
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Lumley, L. R.
Watts, Dr. T.


Drewe, C.
Lynn, Sir R. J.
Wells, S. R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Williams, Com. c. (Devon, Torquay)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Macintyre, Ian
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Windsor-Clive. Lieut.-Colonel George


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Wise, Sir Fredric


Everard, W. Lindsay
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wood, E.(Chest'r. Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Fermoy, Lord
Merriman, F. B.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Fielden, E. B.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Finburgh, S.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Fleming, D. P.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Major Cope and Mr. F. C. Thomson.


Ford, P. J.
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Benn. Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Broad, F. A
Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Buchanan, G.
Crawfurd, H. E.


Ammon, Charles George
Cape, Thomas
Dalton, Hugh


Barr, J.
Charleton, H. C
Day, Colonel Harry

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I also have been making a mental note, and I really must ask the hon. Member not to repeat the same thing.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 170; Noes, 80.

Duckworth, John
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sitch, Charles H.


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Fenby, T. D.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Gibbins, Joseph
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Stamford, T. W.


Gillett, George M.
Kelly, W. T.
Stephen, Campbell


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Kirkwood, D.
Sutton, J. E.


Grenfell, O. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawson, John James
Tinker, John Joseph


Grundy, T. W.
Mac Donald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Varley, Frank B.


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Mackinder, W.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
MacLaren, Andrew
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Maxton, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Hardie, George D.
Morris, R. H.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Harris, Percy A.
Murnin, H.
Welsh, J. C.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Oliver, George Harold
Westwood, J.


Hayday, Arthur
Paling, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hayes, John Henry
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Potts, John S.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hirst, G. H.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Windsor, Walter


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Riley, Ben



Hudson, J. H. Huddersfield
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Scurr, John
Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Warne.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)

Mr. CHARLETON: I beg to move in page 19, line 8, column 1, to leave out the word "twenty", and to insert instead thereof the word "sixty."

Division No. 176.]
AYES.
[3.5 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Loder, J. de V.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Lumley, L. R.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Fermoy, Lord
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fielden, E. B.
Macintyre, Ian


Barnett. Major Richard W.
Finburgh, S.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Fleming, D. P,
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Ford, P. J.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Betterton, Henry B.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Merriman, F. B.


Blundell, F. N.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Brass, Captain W.
Gee, Captain R.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nelson, Sir Frank


Briscoe, Richard George
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Neville, R. J.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Goff, Sir Park
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Gower, Sir Robert
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Nuttall, Ellis


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Burman, J. B.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Penny, Frederick George


Campbell, E. T.
Hammersley, S. S.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hanbury, C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pielou, D. P.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hartington, Marquess of
Pilcher, G.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Haslam, Henry C.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Christie, J. A.
Hawke, John Anthony
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Radford, E. A.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Remer, J. R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cope, Major William
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hilton, Cecil
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Crooksnank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Huntingfield, Lord
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew, W)


Dean, A. W.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Dixey, A. C.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Shepperson, E. W.


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Drewe, C.
Jacob, A. E.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Eden, Captain Anthony
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Lamb, J. Q.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)

Question put, "That the word 'twenty' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 169; Noes, 80.

Storry Deans, R.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Watts, Dr. T.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Strickland, Sir Gerald
Wells, S R.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)



Styles, Captain H. Walter
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Margesson.


Tinne, J. A.
Wise, Sir Fredric





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Riley, Ben


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hayday, Arthur
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Sinclair, Major Sir A. (Caithness)


Barr, J.
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Buchanan, G.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. W.


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sutton, J. E.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Varley, Frank B.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Warne, G. H.


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Duckworth, John
Kirkwood, D.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lawson, John James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
MacLaren, Andrew
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Oliver, George Harold
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Paling, W.



Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Shetland)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Harris, Percy A,
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 9, column 1, to leave out the word "value," and to insert instead thereof the words "aggregate of the values of all the components."
In doing so I should like to raise a rather wider question and that is what is the interpretation among ourselves of the question of a reasonable hour. There was a very broad and at the same time a very clear understanding that the Schedule and Committee stage should be completed at a reasonable hour, since which certain other events have occurred, certain prolongations of discussion on the afternoon Debate. I quite agree that a reasonable hour should be considered as having been somewhat extended but still there it is—a broad understanding was come to that these matters should be disposed of at a reasonable hour. But I think I must invite from the Leader of the Opposition, who is heroically manning the trenches, for some further illustration of his ideas on this point.

Mr. MacDONALD: I am sure the Committee will believe me when I say that it is a most painful duty to me to be here at this most unseemly hour.
The Chancellor referred to the change that took place by adding two Liberal Amendments which were not on the Paper and not contemplated when the bargain as to a reasonable hour was come to. He had not told us, when this arrangement was made that he was going to make this change in the agricultural Clause.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Oh, yes, certainly, because when the discussion came up and I made this shocking disclosure, my idea was to put it on the Paper only in time for the Report stage and the right hon. Gentleman objected to it. I then said I would put it down to be in time to be discussed on Wednesday, therefore, I accelerated by putting it down to facilitate discussion at a time which was most agreeable. Then there was a further suggestion to put down the Amendment in order to give the fullest opportunity for debate, which I must say they have taken advantage of. All this is part of the understanding of a reasonable hour of the night.

Mr. MacDONALD: I really do not want to press the point. As a matter of fact, the observation I made at the time, which the Chancellor quoted against me yesterday, was that I warned
him what the probable effect of the De-bate would be; but I think I am within the recollection of the Committee when I say that I did say that to me a reasonable hour was either a quarter-past 12 or, if that failed, six o'clock in the morning.

Captain BENN: On this point, it is perfectly true that last night we forewent our right to move about 15 New Clauses and the Chancellor himself said that the New Clauses would involve a three days' Debate. It is also true that we undertook not to prolong and would prevent if we could any prolongation that would prevent the House meeting this day for prayers. So far as we are concerned, I think the right hon. Gentleman will admit that the Amendments we have moved have not been supported by any irrelevant or ineffective arguments so far as we are concerned, and we have only two others of substance on the Paper. If we can move these, we are quite prepared to expedite business. If hon. Gentlemen are prepared to sit till six o'clock, then I am quite agreeable. The right hon. Gentleman, I think, will admit—I would be grateful to him if he would—that the Amendments we have moved have been Amendments of substance.

Mr. CHURCHILL: It is for the right hon. Gentleman who leads the Opposition to put his own construction on what he considers a reasonable hour. I cannot quarrel with the definition he chooses to make, but I would point out that we began on Monday night, and after prolonging the sitting steadily and continuing it again last night, it was in our power to use the strength of the great majority of Members who are in attendance upon the service of the House. We did not do that. We tried to come to an arrangement with the varying sections of the Opposition. I hope I shall not be saying anything offensive, but it is almost as difficult to come to an arrangement with China at the present time. When you have settled up with the Mukden War Lord you have missed the Christian General. I do not press the topic any further. You have allowed it to be developed upon the classic Motion, "That the Committee do report Progress and ask leave to sit again." I will address myself to the Amendment that is on the Paper in my name.

Mr. MacDONALD: I would like to add a sentence. I would quite seriously
remind the Government of what I stated when this matter was discussed. My hon. Friends behind me are in a position which makes is quite impossible for them to get home after 12.30, and if they sit here until 2 or 3 o'clock they are stranded. I hope hon. Members opposite quite understand that.

Mr. J. JONES: Speaking as one of the ordinary Members of the House who has to walk home 12 miles if kept here after 12 or pay a taxi fare of 30s. I am not anxious to stay here all night because I can say all I want to say before 11. But I do say, so far as I am concerned, that if we are kept here, I would rather stay here talking about things about which I know nothing than to have to walk 12 miles to Silvertown. I do know something about my own people, and they protest against this prolongation of tongue and jaw. One thing upon which there ought to be a tax is jaw. We have no private motor-cars to take us home. I do not grudge them the right. I want to see the day come when all the people will be able to have motor cars.

The CHAIRMAN: The hour and the occasion have led me into a serious dereliction of duty. To allow the discussion to proceed is entirely out of order.

Mr. JONES: I never was in order yet.

The CHAIRMAN: I call upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer to come to his Amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL: This Amendment is the leading Amendment of a series of five Amendments which deal with the same point. It is not a point of principle; it is purely one of definition. We are dealing here with the importation of made-up goods. We are imposing an ad valorem duty on made-up goods, and we are varying that duty in accordance with the silk contents in those goods. There are two points to be considered, each involving the application of a series of percentages. There is the question of the percentage of the silk content which depends on whether the percentage is to be calculated in relation to the aggregate value of the component parts of the article—the cloth, the leather, or whatever it may be added together—or ought it to be calculated upon the made-up value of the article. We have definitely decided that, in calculating the proportion of the silk content in the value of the
article it is to be based upon the relation between the silk content and the aggregate value of the component parts, and not upon the style or fashion value which could be given to those component parts when assembled by the skill and art of human beings in the finished article. Thus the duty proceeds as set out in the Schedule in three stages.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: Do I understand from the Chancellor of the Exchequer that it applies in both columns or only applies in the first column.

Major CRAWFURD: The right hon. Gentleman says that these Amendments are mere matters of definition and do not raise any point of substance. May I put my question in a form which may conceivably appeal to Members opposite. Take for instance a Paris frock to be worn at Ascot. The Chancellor used the figure of £40. My calculation would be a little higher. Let me assume that the frock would cost £50, that it contains £2 worth of silk, and that the aggregate value of the component parts is £10. If the value of the silk is £2 0s. 1d. that article comes into the 33⅓ per cent. category, and the tax would be over £16.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I understand that the Chancellor does not propose to change the word value of the article in the second column of this Schedule. I suggest that if he is going to change it in the first column he should change it in the second, otherwise he will get a very considerable duty, and a very improper duty.

Mr. CHURCHILL: No. The hon. Member has fallen into an error, and he seeks by his counsel to lead us into an absurdity. The object of the first column is to fix the relation of the silk to the total value of the article. That is achieved. The second column only prescribes the amount that would be levied on an article in regard to which the relation has been so fixed.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The Chancellor gave us £4 as the value of the component parts and £40 as the value of the finished article. The silk may be, say, £2. Therefore if you are going to charge 33⅓ per cent. on the finished article you would be charging £13. Surely he does not propose on a £2 article to put a tax of £13?

Captain BENN: One can say in a sentence what all this means. Why this Amendment was moved with so much dialectics by the Chancellor I do not know, but it is only another step in the road to full Protection. That is why things which are liable to a 10 per cent. duty are being pushed into the 33⅓ per cent. duty. That is the whole story. The fact is the Chancellor has bought the support of a number of silk industries by promising them protection.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The whole effect of this series of Amendments is mitigation.

Mr. MacDONALD: How can it be mitigation? In calculating whether the high rate is to be paid or the low rate it is not the full value of the article that has to be taken into consideration, but its partial value. It is not 20 per cent. of the article, but 20 per cent. of a portion of the price of the article, and when you reach 20 per cent. as part of the price of the article then you impose a tax of 33⅓ per cent. on the whole value of the article. Instead of being mitigation it is a substantial increase in the rate of protection. And when you have reached 33⅓ per cent. duty on the full value of the article that might itself amount to more than the cost price of the materials which you are taxing. That certainly is a most astounding proposal, and one which we shall certainly oppose.

Mr. CHURCHILL: If you push the tax beyond a certain point in regard to a particular article the reaction is obvious. If an importer feels that his article is likely to be unfairly treated and pay an excessive duty, then all he has to do is to send the silk over separately, and the other materials separately, and the finishing process is done in this country.

Mr. MacDONALD: Is not this the meaning of that: that a straw hat the lining of which is nominally taxed under this Bill? By this process, if the silk goes beyond a certain proportion, then it is not the silk that is to be taxed but the straw hat. This is not, therefore, for the purposes of revenue. It is protection against the importation of straw hats.

Mr. MACKINDER: There appears to be no connection between paragraphs 1 and 2 in this Schedule. If the articles specified in paragraph 1 contain 21 per cent. of silk, then it pays this duty of 33⅓
per cent., but according to the next paragraph, if it has 19 per cent. of silk the tax is reduced from 33⅓ per cent. to 10 per cent., a reduction of 23⅓ per cent. for a 2 per cent. reduction of material. The whole thing is out of proportion, and what the Chancellor was thinking about in pass-

Division No. 177.]
AYES.
[3.40 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Potts, John S.


Adamson, w. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hayes, John Henry
Riley, Ben


Ammon, Charles George
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Robinson, W.C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Barr, J.
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scurr, John


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Broad, F. A.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Buchanan, G.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cape, Thomas
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. W.


Charleton, H. C.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sutton, J. E.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Tinker, John Joseph


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Varley, Frank B.


Dalton, Hugh
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Day, Colonel Harry
Kelly, W. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Duckworth, John
Kirkwood, D.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lawson, John James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
MacLaren, Andrew
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Oliver, George Harold
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Paling, W.



Hardie, George D.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Harris, Percy A.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Warne.




NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Dixey, A. C.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Drewe, C.
Hopkins, J. W. w.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Huntingfield, Lord


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Betterton, Henry B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Blundell, F. N.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Jacob, A. E.


Brass, Captain W.
Fermoy, Lord
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Fielden, E. B.
Lamb, J. Q.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Fleming, D. P.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Briscoe, Richard George
Ford, P. J.
Loder, J. de V.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Lumley, L. R.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Ganzoni, sir John
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Burman, J. B.
Gee, Captain R.
Macintyre, Ian


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Macmillan Captain H.


Campbell, E. T.
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Goff, Sir Park
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Chapman, Sir S.
Gower, Sir Robert
Margesson, Captain D.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Grotrian, H. Brent
Merriman, F. B.


Christie, J. A.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hanbury, C.
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Harland, A.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Cope, Major William
Harrison, G. J. C.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hartington, Marquess of
Nuttall, Ellis


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Haslam, Henry C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hawke, John Anthony
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Penny, Frederick George


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Pielou, D. P.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Hilton, Cecil
Pilcher, G.

ing an anomaly of this description passes my comprehension.

Question put, "That the word 'value' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 78; Noes, 165.

Power, Sir John Cecil
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)
Tinne, J. A.


Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Watts, Dr. T.


Radford, E. A.
Shepperson, E. W.
Wells, S. R.


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Remer, J. R.
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgewater)


Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Strickland, Sir Gerald
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Sandeman, A. Stewart
Styles, Captain H. Walter



Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Captain Douglas Hacking and Major Hennessy.


Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

Division No. 178.]
AYES.
[3.50 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Nelson, Sir Frank


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Neville, R. J.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Gee, Captain R.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Nuttall, Ellis


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Penny, Frederick George


Betterton, Henry B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Blundell, F. N.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Pielou, D. P.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Pilcher, G.


Brass, Captain W.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hammersley, S. S.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Hanbury, C.
Radford, E. A.


Briscoe, Richard George
Harland, A.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Harrison, G. J. C.
Remer, J. R.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Hartington, Marquess of
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Haslam, Henry C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C. (Newbury)
Hawke, John Anthony
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Burman, J. B.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Campbell, E. T.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Chapman, Sir S.
Hilton, Cecil
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Christie, J. A.
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Shepperson, E. W.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. sir George L.
Huntingfield, Lord
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Jacob, A. E.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Curzon, Captain Viscount
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lamb, J. Q.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Loder, J. de V.
Tinne, J. A.


Dixey, A. C.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Lumley, L. R.
Watts, Dr. T.


Drewe, C.
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Wells, S. R.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Macintyre, Ian
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Wise, Sir Fredric


Everard, W. Lindsay
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Margesson, Captain D.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Fermoy, Lord
Merriman, F. B.
Woodcock, Colonel H. C.


Fielden, E. B.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.



Fleming, D. P.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut. -Col. J. T. C.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Ford, P. J.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Major Cope and Lord Stanley)




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Barr, J.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Ammon, Charles George
Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)

The Committee divided: Ayes, 168; Noes, 76.

Broad, F. A.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Buchanan, G.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Scurr, John


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
such, Charles H.


Charleton, H. C.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Jones, H. H. (Merioneth)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Stamford, T. W.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Stephen, Campbell


Dalton, Hugh
Kelly, W. T.
Sutton, J. E.


Day, Colonel Harry
Kennedy, T.
Tinker, John Joseph


Duckworth, John
Kirkwood, D.
Varley, Frank B.


Fenby, T. D.
Lawson, John James
Wallhead, Richard C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Gillett, George M.
Mackinder, W.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Maxton, James
Welsh, J. C.


Grundy, T. W.
Morris, R. H.
Westwood, J.


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Murnin, H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Oliver, George Harold
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Hardie, George D.
Paling, W.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hayday, Arthur
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Windsor, Walter


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Potts, John S.



Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hirst, G. H.
Riley, Ben
Mr. Warne and Mr. Hayes.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 11, column 1, after the word "silk," to insert the word "component."

Division No. 179.]
AYES.
[3.58 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Edmondson, Major A. J.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Elliot, Walter E.
Lamb, J. Q


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Loder, J. de V.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lumley, L. R.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Fermoy, Lord
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Fielden, E. B.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Fleming, D. P.
Macintyre, Ian


Betterton, Henry B.
Ford, P. J.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Blundell, F. N.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Boothby, R. J. G.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Brass, Captain W.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Margesson, Captain D.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Gee, Captain R.
Merriman, F. B.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Briscoe, Richard George
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Goff, Sir Park
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Gower, Sir Robert
Nelson, Sir Frank


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Neville. R. J.


Burman, J. B.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Campbell, E. T.
Hammersley, S. S.
Nuttall, Ellis


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)
Hanbury, C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Harland, A.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Chapman, Sir S.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Penny, Frederick George


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hartington, Marquess of
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Christie, J. A.
Haslam, Henry C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Hawke, John Anthony
Pielou, D. P.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Pilcher, G.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Power, Sir John Cecil


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Cope. Major William
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Radford, E. A.


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Hilton, Cecil
Remer, J. R.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hogg, Rt. Hon. Sir D. (St. Marylebone)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Huntingfield, Lord
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Dixey, A. C.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Drewe, C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel, (Renfrew, W)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Jacob, A. E.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)

Question put, "That the word 'component' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 167; Noes, 75.

Shepperson, E. W.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Sprot, Sir Alexander
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
Tinne, J. A.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Gridgwater)


Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
Watts, Dr. T.



Strickland, Sir Gerald
Wells, S. R.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Lord Stanley and Captain Douglas.


Styles, Captain H. Walter
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)
Hacking.




NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks. W. R., Elland).


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Collins, Sir Godfrey (Greenock)
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C


Cowan. D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duckworth, John
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Fenby, T. D.
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gillett, George M.
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grundy, T. W.
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hardie, George D.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Hayday, Arthur
Riley, Ben



Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD OF EDUCATION (Lord Eustace Percy): I beg to move, in page 19, line 13, column 1, to leave out the word "value" and to insert instead thereof the words
aggregate of the values of all the components.

Captain BENN: Can the President of the Board of Education move a new tax in Committee of Ways and Means?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: The Question is, "That the word 'value' stand part of the Schedule."

Captain BENN: May I invite the Noble Lord who moved this Amendment to give us a brief explanation?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: If he did, I should have to call him to order for repetition.

Captain BENN: The Amendment has been moved, and I think I am perfectly in order in asking the Noble Lord to explain the Amendment. It is a new Amendment. As a matter of fact, it refers to a new class of article. The Noble Lord having moved it, should explain it.

Mr. MACKINDER: May we have the assurance of the Chancellor of the Exchequer, or the Financial Secretary, or the President of the Board of Education that they are entering into a new method of Protection under the disguise of protecting silk which comes in as a component part of an article? Are we to understand that if thousands of ladies' handbags came here with the lining made purely of silk it is going to be the practice to tax, not the component part of the silk, but the aggregate part of the article?

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: On a previous paragraph the Chancellor challenged my accuracy as to a statement I was making. We are now on the second paragraph. Let me put a small point on this occasion. The Chancellor said that the effect of his changes was slightly to reduce the duty. Is that the case of an article the component parts of which are worth £5 and the value of the whole article is worth—I will put the actual value at £10? [Interruption.]

Mr. KIRKWOOD: On a point of Order If you cannot control those men opposite
you will have to report Progress. I beg to move, "That the Chairman do report Progress, and ask leave to sit again."

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I cannot accept that Motion.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: The question is a very simple one, but after all it is a very serious matter. It really ought to be faced. [Interruption.] I will start again. Take a certain article, the component parts of which are worth £5 and the finished article worth £10. The value of the silk in that article is anything from 5s. to 10s. If we leave the paragraph as it stands here the amount of silk in that article would be less than 5 per cent. and it would only therefore involve a 4s. duty. If the Chancellor did what I suggested and took his definition of value in both columns as the same, the result would be, it would pay on that smaller value and it would pay about 10s. If, on the other hand, the Chancellor insists on taking the value of the article as the aggregate of the component parts the silk in that would be more than 5 per cent., yet when he comes to take the percentage of duty he takes it on the £10 and in consequence he brings the duty up from 4s. to £1 and that is a serious proposal.

Division No. 180.]
AYES.
[4.18 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Riley, Ben


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Barr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hardie, George D.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.
Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Warne.


Hayes, John Henry
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)





NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Brass, Captain W.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Brassey, Sir Leonard


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Betterton, Henry B.
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Briscoe, Richard George


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Blundell, F. N.
Brittain, Sir Harry


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Boothby, R. J. G.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.

Mr. CHURCHILL: I must say I really hardly understand the hon. Member's demonstration. The actual validity of that demonstration can only be judged in relation to the actual facts, and those facts naturally govern the whole incidence of the tax, and that is the respective value of the component parts on the one hand and the finished article on the other. The intention of the Clause is exactly what I say.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I will not argue the question of the lucidity of the statement. It is perfectly clear that the actual tax would double in each individual case. The change the Chancellor is making will increase and in no case reduce the amount of the tax.

Captain BENN: Why has the right hon. Gentleman taken articles for the use of poor people? By this Amendment that he is moving to-night he is altering the duty from 10 per cent. to 30 per cent. All the persiflage in the world will not excuse him from committing what is really a crime on the poor people of this country.

Question put, "That the word 'value' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 74; Noes, 164.

Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William


Burman, J. B.
Hammersley, S. S.
Penny, Frederick George


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Hanbury, C.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Campbell, E. T.
Harland, A.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pielou, D. P.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hartington, Marquess of
Power, Sir John Cecil


Chapman, Sir S.
Haslam, Henry C.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hawke, John Anthony
Radford, E. A.


Christie, J. A.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Henderson, Capt. R. B.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cope, Major William
Hilton, Cecil
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. George L.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Huntingfield, Lord
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Shepperson, E. W.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Dixey, A. C.
Jacob, A. E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Drewe, C.
Lamb, J. Q.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Loder, J. de V.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Luce, Major-Gen, Sir Richard Harman
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Lumley, L. R.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Everard, W. Lindsay
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macintyre, Ian
Tinne, J. A.


Fermoy, Lord
Macmillan, Captain H.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Fielden, E. B.
Mac Robert. Alexander M.
Watts, Dr. T.


Fleming, D. P.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Wells, S. R.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Fraser, Captain Ian
Margesson, Captain D.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Merriman, F. B.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Ganzoni, Sir John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Gee, Captain R.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Nelson, Sir Frank



Gaff, Sir Park
Neville, R. J.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Gower, Sir Robert
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Major


Grotrian, H. Brent
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sir Harry Barnston.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nuttall, Ellis

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

Division No. 181.]
AYES.
[4.26 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Fielden, E. B.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Christie, J. A.
Fleming, D. P.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fraser, Captain Ian


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Ganzoni, Sir John


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gee, Captain R.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Betterton, Henry B.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Goff, Sir Park


Blundell, F. N.
Crockshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Gower, Sir Robert


Boothby, R. J. G.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Grotrian, H. Brent


Brass, Captain W.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William
Clive Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Briscoe, Richard George
Dixey, A. C.
Hammersley, S. S.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hanbury, C.


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Drewe, C.
Harland, A.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Harrison, G. J. C.


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hartington, Marquess of


Burman, J. B.
Elliot, Walter E.
Haslam, Henry C.


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hawke, John Anthony


Campbell, E. T.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Chapman, Sir S.
Fermoy, Lord
Hennessy, Major J. R. G

The Committee divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 74.

Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Hilton, Cecil
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Shepperson, E. W.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Neville, R. J.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Nuttall, Ellis
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Stott. Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Huntingfield, Lord
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Penny, Frederick George
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sugden, sir Wilfrid


Jacob, A. E.
Pielou, D. P.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Pilcher, G.
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Lamb, J. Q.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Tinne, J. A.


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Pownail, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Loder, J. de V.
Radford, E. A.
Watts, Dr. T.


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Wells, S. R.


Lumley, L. R.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Macintyre, Ian
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Macmillan, Captain H.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wise, Sir Fredric


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Maitland, sir Arthur D. Steel-
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Sanders, Sir Robert A.



Merriman, F. B.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Captain Margesson and Major Sir Harry Barnston.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline).


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Riley, Ben

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 15, column 1, after the word "silk", to insert the word "component."

Division No. 182.]
AYES.
[4.35 a.m.


Aqcland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Briscoe, Richard George
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Brittain, Sir Harry
Cope, Major William


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Burman, J. B.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Campbell, E. T.
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Curzon, Captain Viscount


Betterton, Henry B.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Dalkeith, Earl of


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Chapman, Sir S.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)


Blundell F. N.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley


Boothby, R. J. G.
Christie, J. A.
Dixey, A. C.


Brass, Captain W.
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Drewe, C.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Eden, Captain Anthony

Question put, "That the word 'component' be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 74.

Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Huntingfield, Lord
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Jacob, A. E.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Fermoy, Lord
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Fielden, E. B.
Lamb, J. Q.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Fleming, D. P.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Loder, J. de V.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Fraser, Captain Ian
Luce, Maj.-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Fremantle, Lt.-Col. Francis E.
Lumley, L. R.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Gee, Captain R
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Shepperson, E. W.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Macintyre, Ian
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Macmillan Captain H.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Goff, Sir Park
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G.(Westm'eland)


Gower, Sir Robert
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Grotrian, H. Brent
Margesson, Captain O.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Merriman, F. B.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Styles, Capt. H. W.


Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut. -Col. J. T. C.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Hammersley, S. S.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Hanbury, C.
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Harland, A.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Tinne, J. A.


Harrison, G. J. C.
Neville, R. J.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Hartington, Marquess of
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Watts, Dr. T.


Haslam, Henry C.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Wells, S. R.


Hawke, John Anthony
Nuttall, Ellis
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Penny, Frederick George
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Hilton, Cecil
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Pielou, D. P.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Pilcher, G.



Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Power, Sir John Cecil
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hopkins, J. W. W.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Major Hennessy and Lord Stanley.


Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Radford, E. A.





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H.
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Stirling)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor Walter


Hall. G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Riley, Ben

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 16, column 1, to leave out (the word "value", and to insert instead thereof the words
aggregate of the values of all the components.

Captain BENN: I think it is time that hon. Members of this Committee made some protest against the obstruction of
the Budget by Amendments of a drafting character moved by the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Hon. Members of this House have moved four Amendments, and I think this is the eleventh the Chancellor of the Exchequer has moved to his own Budget. The Amendments which have caused the difficulty have been Amendments moved from the Treasury Bench
by the Chancellor himself or, in his absence, by the President of the Board of Education. I only rise to speak on this Amendment because the next Amendment proposes to exempt articles with less than 1 per cent. of the value silk. It is an Amendment very much desired by those interested, and a very reasonable Amendment. I would ask if you, Sir, intend to call that Amendment?

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I propose to call that Amendment.

Mr. CHURCHILL: All the series of Amendments are in the main of a subsidiary, or drafting, character and are the result of prolonged discussion on different aspects of the trade. If our legislation is to be as little onerous as possible, it is necessary it should be carefully shaped and finished. I feel some apology is due to the Committee because of the many Amendments placed on the Paper, but I would advise my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Leith (Capt. Benn) not to employ terms of recrimination against the Government in this matter. I understood we had met the wishes of hon. Members in the general conduct of the Debate this afternoon, and that he would

Division No. 183.]
AYES.
[4.48 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Bt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Riley, Ben


Adamson, w. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hint, G. H.
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Barr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Atterclifle)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hardie, George D.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.
Mr. T. Kennedy and Mr. Warne.


Hayes, John Henry
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)





NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Betterton, Henry B.
Brocklebank, C. E. R.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Blundell, F. N.
Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Boothby, R. J. G.
Burman, J. B.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Brass, Captain W.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Campbell, E. T.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Briscoe, Richard George
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Brittain, Sir Harry
Chapman, Sir S.

have facilitated hon. Members reaching their homes at a reasonable hour, but he did not do that. I am not making any reproach against those Members who were unfortunately stranded here, and are occupying their time pacing the lobby in divisions. I think the hon. Member (Capt. Benn) should be the last Member of the House to protest.

Captain BENN: I must say I consider—[Interruption].

The DEPUTY-CHAIRMAN: I called upon the hon. and gallant Member for Leith.

Captain BENN: I very much resent what the Chancellor of the Exchequer has said. We moved about two or three amendments of substance. We took very little part in the debate, and the right hon. Gentleman charges us with breaking the agreement. We have most faithfully observed our obligation, and I consider the charge most uncalled for.

Question put, "That the word 'value' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 74; Noes, 164.

Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Haslam, Henry C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frame)


Christie, J. A.
Hawke, John Anthony
Pielou, D. P.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Pilcher, G.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Power, Sir John Cecil


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Radford, E. A.


Cope, Major William
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hilton, Cecil
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford Hereford)


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Dalkeith, Earl of
Huntingfield, Lord
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Dixey, A. C.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Jacob, A. E.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Drewe, C.
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Shepperson, E. W.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lamb, J. Q.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Edmonson, Major A. J.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Loder, J. de V.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lumley, L. R.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Fermoy, Lord
Macintyre, Ian
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Fielden, E. B.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Fleming, D. P.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Fraser, Captain Ian
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Margesson, Captain D.
Tinne, J. A.


Ganzoni, Sir John
Merriman, F. B.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Gee, Captain R.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Watts, Dr. T.


Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Wells, S. R.


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Goff Sir Park
Nall, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Gower, Sir Robert
Nelson, Sir Frank
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Grotrian, H. Brent
Neville, R. J.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Gunston, Captain D. w.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Hammersley, S. S.
Nuttall, Ellis
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Hanbury, C.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh



Harland, A.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Harrison, G. J. C.
Penny, Frederick George
Colonel Gibbs and Captain


Hartington, Marquess of
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Douglas Hacking.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

Division No. 184.]
AYES.
[4.55 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Ganzoni, Sir John


Alexander, Brig.-Gen. Sir W.(Glas., C.)
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gee, Captain R.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Cope, Major William
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Goff, Sir Park


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Gower, Sir Robert


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Grotrian, H. Brent


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Betterton, Henry B.
Crookshank, Col. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Blundell, F. N.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hemmersley, S. S.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hanbury, C.


Brass, Captain W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Harland, A.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Dixey, A. C.
Harrison, G. J. C.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hartington, Marquess of


Briscoe, Richard George
Drewe, C.
Haslam, Henry C.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hawke, John Anthony


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Edmonson, Major A. J.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Brown, Brig. -Gen. H. C. (Berks, Newb'y)
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Heneage, Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Burman, J. B.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Herbert, S.(York, N.R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hilton, Cecil


Campbell, E. T.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Fermoy, Lord
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fielden, E. B.
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Chapman, Sir S.
Fleming, D. P.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Christie, J. A.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Huntingfield, Lord

The Committee divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 73.

Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Nuttall, Ellis
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sdan, E.)


Jacob, A. E.
Ormsby-Gore, Hon. William
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


King, Captain Henry Douglas
Penny, Frederick George
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Lamb, J. Q.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Loder, J. de V.
Pielou, D. P.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Pilcher, G.
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Lumley, L. R.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Radford, E. A.
Tinne, J. A.


Macintyre, Ian
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Macmillan Captain H.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Watts, Dr. T.


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Wells, S. R.


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Margesson, Captain D.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Merriman, F. B.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wise, Sir Fredric


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)



Nelson, Sir Frank
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl.(Renfrew, W.)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Neville, R. J.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Major Hennessy and Lord Stanley.


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Shepperson, E. W.





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. w.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Varley, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duckworth, John
Lawson, John James
Welsh, J. c.


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.


Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Hayes, John Henry
Riley, Ben

Captain BENN: I beg to move, in page 19, line 16, at the end, to insert the words, "Where the value of the silk or artificial silk does not exceed one per cent, of the value of the article. … No duty shall be charged."
I move this Amendment in order merely to prevent a tariff of from 2 to 10 per cent. being charged on a number of articles in common use, many of which are articles of clothing, and in order to prevent that tariff being imposed which was never intended when they started to tax silk. I put down an Amendment that where the silk content does not exceed one per cent. there should be no duty. It is a perfectly reasonable Amendment, I submit, and I hope the Chancellor will see his way to accept it.

Mr. GUINNESS: The tax proposed is not so serious as the hon. and gallant Member suggests. The reason we cannot accept the Amendment is that, if we do so, we would be throwing an unfair disadvantage on the home producer. We cannot possibly give Protection to the foreigner against the home producer.

Mr. J. JONES: I cannot understand the very great enthusiasm exhibited. We can all appreciate the ability of the hon. and gallant Member who moved this Amendment and wants an explanation. The real explanation is the absence of his colleagues. It is a very extraordinary thing that although they have been claiming in the Press that they are the only pebbles on the beach their leaders are absent. [Cries of "Withdraw!"] I am
not going to differentiate between the leaders because it would be impossible almost to say who are the leaders and who the followers. But so far as we are concerned we object to these taxes in toto. At least a majority of us. I do not know the difference between tin and silk. This is not a tax on silk. It is a tin tax. There is no longer a gold band round the Empire, but a tin band.

Captain BENN: I beg to ask leave to withdraw my Amendment.

Division No. 185.]
AYES.
[5.10 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks. W. R., Eland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn, (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Crundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.



Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Riley, Ben





NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gower, Sir Robert


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cope, Major William
Grotrian, H. Brent


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Ashmead-Bartlett E.
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hammersley, S. S.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hanbury, C.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Harland, A.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Crookshank, Col. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hartington, Marquess of


Betterton, Henry B.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Haslam, Henry C.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hawke, John Anthony


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Dixey, A. C.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Blundell, F. N.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Drewe, C.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Brass, Captain W.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Edmonson, Major A. J.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Hilton, Cecil


Briscoe, Richard George
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.


Brittain, Sir Harry
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Fermoy, Lord
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)


Burman, J. B.
Fielden, E. B.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fleming, D. P.
Huntingfield, Lord


Campbell, E. T.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Hutchison, G. A. C.(Midl'n & Peebles)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Chapman, Sir S.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Jacob, A. E.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Gee, Captain R.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Christie, J. A.
Gibbs. Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Lamb, J. Q.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Loder, J. de V.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Goff, Sir Park
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, in page 19, lines 21 and 22, column 2, to leave out the words "For every pound of silk in the article."

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 74; Noes, 165.

Lumley, L. R.
Pilcher, G.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Lynn, Sir Robert J.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Strickland, Sir Gerald


MacDonald R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Macintyre, I.
Radford, E. A.
styles, Captain H. Walter S


Macmillan, Captain H.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Sudden, Sir Wilfrid


Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Tasker, Major R. I.


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Tinne, J. A.


Margesson, Captain D.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynsmouth)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Merriman, F. B.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Watts, Dr. T.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Wells, S. R.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Nelson, Sir Frank
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Neville, R. J.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W.)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Wise, Sir Fredric


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Shepperson, E. W.
Wood B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Nuttall, Ellis
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Sprot, Sir Alexander



Penny, Frederick George
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Captain Douglas Hacking and Captain Viscount Curzon.


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)



Pielou, D. P.

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, in page 19, line 25, column 1, after the word "yarn," to insert the words "the 1b."

Division No. 186.]
AYES.
[5.19 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Everard, W. Lindsay
MacDonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Macintyre, I.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Fermoy, Lord
Macmillan, Captain H.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Fielden, E. B.
MacRobert, Alexander M.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fleming, D. P.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Fraser, Captain Ian
Margesson, Captain D.


Betterton, Henry B.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Merriman, F. B.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Ganzoni, Sir John
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Gee, Captain R.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.


Blundell, F. N.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive


Boothby, R. J. G.
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Nail Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph


Brass, Captain W.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Goff, Sir Park
Neville, R. J.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Gower, Sir Robert
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Briscoe, Richard George
Grotrian, H. Brent
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nuttall, Ellis


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Penny, Frederick George


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, N wb'y)
Hammersley, S. S.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Burman, J. B.
Hanbury, C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Harland, A.
Pielou, D. P.


Campbell, E. T.
Harrison, G. J. C.
Pilcher, G


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R (Prtsmth. S.)
Hartington, Marquess of
Power, Sir John Cecil


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Haslam, Henry C.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Chapman, Sir S.
Hawke, John Anthony
Radford, E. A.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Christie, J. A.
Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Herbert, S.(York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cope, Major William
Hilton, Cecil
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)


Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mcl. (Renfrew, W)


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Huntingfield, Lord
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Shepperson, E. W.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Dixey, A. C.
Jacob, A. E.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F.(Will'sden, E.)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
King, Capt. Henry Douglas
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Drewe, C.
Lamb, J. Q.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Edmonson, Major A. J.
Loder, J. de V.
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Lumley, L. R.
Styles, Captain H. Walter

Question put, "That those words be there inserted.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 71.

Sugden, Sir Wilfrid
Wells, S. R.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Tasker, Major R. Inigo
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Tinne, J. A.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)



Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Major Sir Harry Barnston.


Watts, Dr. T.
Wise, Sir Fredric





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Variey, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
Lawson, John James
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
MacLaren, Andrew
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grundy, T. W.
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Oliver, George Harold
Windsor, Walter


Hardie, George D.
Paling, W.



Hayday, Arthur
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hayes, John Henry
Potts, John S.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 27, column 1, to leave out the word "Undischarged," and to insert instead thereof the words
Not wholly discharged. … the lb.

Division No. 187.]
AYES.
15.27 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W.(Fife, West)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, G. H.
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Sitch, C. H.


Barr, J.
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Broad, F. A.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kelly, W. T.
Varley, Frank B.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kennedy, T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Day, Colonel Harry
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Duckworth, John
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Fenby, T. D.
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hardie, George D.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.
Mr. Warne and Mr. Hayes.


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)






NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Brass, Captain w.
Charteris, Brigadier-General J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Brassey, Sir Leonard
Christie, J. A.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Briscoe, Richard George
Cobb, Sir Cyril


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Brittain, Sir Harry
Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Cope, Major William


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, N. wb'y)
Courtauld, Major J. S.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Burman, J. B.
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.


Betterton, Henry B.
Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Campbell, E. T.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry


Blundell, F. N.
Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Chapman, Sir S.
Curzon, Captain Viscount

Question put, That the word 'Undischarged' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 73; Noes, 165.

Dalkeith, Earl of
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Radford, E. A.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Dixey, A. C.
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Drewe, C.
Huntingfield, Lord
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Edmonson, Major A. J.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Jacob, A. E.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Lamb, J. Q.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel.(Renfrew, W.)


Fermoy, Lord
Loder, J. de V.
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Fielden, E. B.
Looker, Herbert William
Shepperson, E. W.


Fleming, D. P.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Lumley, L. R.
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Fraser, Captain Ian
Lynn, Sir R. J.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Ganzoni, Sir John
Macintyre, I.
Stanley, Major Hon. O. (W'morland)


Gee, Captain R.
Macmillan, Captain H.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Mac Robert, Alexander M.
Strickland, Sir G.


Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Goff, Sir Park
Margesson, Captain D.
Sugden, Sir W.


Gower, Sir Robert
Merriman, F. B.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Grotrian, H. Brent
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Tinne, J. A.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Hammersley, S. S.
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Watts, Dr. T.


Hanbury, C.
Nelson, Sir Frank
Wells, S. R.


Harland, A.
Neville, R. J.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Harrison, G. J. C.
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Hartington, Marquess of
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Haslam, Henry C.
Nuttall, Ellis
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Hawke, John Anthony
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh
Wise, Sir Fredric


Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Penny, Frederick George
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Henderson, Capt. R. R.(Oxf'd, Henley)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wood, E. (Chestr, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)



Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Pielou, D. P.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Pilcher, G.
Mr. F. C. Thomson and Captain


Hilton, Cecil
Power, Sir John Cecil
Douglas Hacking.


Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton

Question put, "That those words be there inserted."

Division No. 188.]
AYES.
[5.35 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Harrison, G. J. C.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hartington, Marquess of


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Crookshank. Col. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Haslam, Henry C.


Applin, Colonel R. V, K.
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Hawke, John Anthony


Ashmead-Bartlett. E.
Dalkeith, Earl of
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Heneage. Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Betterton, Henry B.
Drewe, C.
Herbert. S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Hilton, Cecil


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Edmonson, Major A. J.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G


Blundell, F. N.
Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Boothby, R. J. G.
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Brass, Captain W.
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Everard, W. Lindsay
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)


Briscoe, Richard George
Fermoy, Lord
Huntingfield, Lord


Brittain, Sir Harry
Fielden, E. B.
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)


Brocklebank, C. E, R.
Fleming, D. P.
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Jacob, A. E.


Burman, J. B.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Ganzoni, Sir John
Lamb, J. Q.


Campbell, E. T.
Gee, Captain R.
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Loder, J. de V.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Chapman, Sir S.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Lumley, L. R.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Goff, Sir Park
Lynn, Sir R. J.


Christie, J. A.
Gower, Sir Robert
MacDonald, R. (Cathcart)


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Grotrian, H. Brent
Macintyre, I.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Macmillan, Captain H.


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Mac Robert. Alexander M.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hammersley, S. S.
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Hanbury, C,
Margesson, Captain D.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Harland, A.
Merriman, F. B.

The Committee divided: Ayes, 164; Noes, 70.

Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Tasker, Major R. I.


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Tinne, J. A.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Neville, R. J.
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Watts, Dr. T.


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Wells, S. R.


Nuttall, Ellis
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W. R., Sowerby)
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew, W)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Penny, Frederick George
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wise, Sir Fredric


Pleiou, D. P.
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F.(Will'sden, E.)
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Plicher, G.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'dge & Hyde)


Power, Sir John Cecil
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)



Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Radford, E. A.
Strickland, Sir G.
Major Cope and Major Sir Harry


Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Barnston.


Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Styles, Captain H. Walter





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W. R., Elland)


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Sarr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duckworth, John
Lawson, John James
Welsh, J. C.


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, G. H. (Derby, Ilkeston)
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Paling, W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Mr. Warne and Mr. Hayes.


Hayday, Arthur

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 19, line 29, column 1, to leave out the words "or in part discharged", and to insert instead thereof the words "discharged. … the lb."

Division No. 189.]
AYES.
[5.45 a.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Scurr, John


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hirst, G. H.
Sitch, Charles H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Barr, J.
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Stamford, T. W.


Broad, F. A.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stephen, Campbell


Buchanan, G.
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Sutton, J. E.


Cape, Thomas
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Tinker, John Joseph


Charleton, H. C.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Varley, Frank B.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Wallhead, Richard C.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kelly, W. T.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Kennedy, T.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
Kirkwood, D.
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duckworth, John
Lawson, John James
Welsh, J. C.


Fenby, T. D.
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Aberavon)
Westwood, J.


Gibbins, Joseph
Mackinder, W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, G. H. (Derby, Ilkeston)
Windsor, Walter


Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)
Paling, W.



Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hardie, George D.
Potts, John S.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Warne.


Hayday, Arthur
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Hayes, John Henry

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 72; Noes, 164.

NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Neville, R. J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Nuttall, Ellis


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Gee, Captain R.
O'Neill, Rt. Hon. Hugh


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Penny, Frederick George


Barnett, Major Richard W.
Gilmour, Colonel Rt. Hon. Sir John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Goff, Sir Park
Pielou, O. P.


Betterton, Henry B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Pilcher, G.


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Grotrian, H. Brent
Power, Sir John Cecil


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton


Blundell, F. N.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Radford, E. A.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)


Brass, Captain W.
Hammersley, S. S.
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.


Brassey, Sir Leonard
Hanbury, C.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hertford)


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Harland, A.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.


Briscoe, Richard George
Harrison, G. J. C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Brittain, Sir Harry
Hartington, Marquess of
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Haslam, Henry C.
Samuel, Samuel (W'dsworth, Putney)


Burman, J. B.
Hawke, John Anthony
Sandeman, A. Stewart


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.
Sanders, Sir Robert A.


Campbell, E. T.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Heneage. Lieut.-Col. Arthur P.
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew W)


Chapman, Sir S.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts, Westb'y)


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Hilton, Cecil
She person, E. W.


Christie, J. A.
Hoare, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir S. J. G.
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard
Sprot, Sir Alexander


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G. F. (Will'sden, E.)


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Howard, Capt. Hon. D. (Cumb., N.)
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'eland)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.


Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Huntingfield, Lord
Strickland, Sir G.


Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hutchison, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'bl's)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Jacob, A. E.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
King, Captain Henry Douglas
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Crookshank, Col. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lamb, J. Q.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Curzon, Captain Viscount
Lister, Cunliffe-, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Loder, J. de V.
Tinne, J. A.


Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Lumley, L. R.
Watson, Rt. Hon. W. (Carlisle)


Dixey, A. C.
Lynn, Sir R. J.
Watts, Dr. T.


Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)
Wells, S. R.


Drewe, C.
Macintyre, I.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Eden, Captain Anthony
Macmillan, Captain H.
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Edmonson, Major A. J.
MacRobert, Alexander M.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Elliot, Captain Walter E.
Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Wise, Sir Fredric


Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Merriman, F. B.
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.



Fermoy, Lord
Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Fielden, E. B.
Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Major Cope and Captain Margesson.


Fleming, D. P.
Nelson, Sir Frank

Proposed words there inserted.

Further Amendments made:

In page 19, line 31, column 1, leave out the word "Undischarged, "and insert the words "Not wholly discharged … the lb."

In page 19, line 32 column 1, leave out the words "or in part."

In page 19, line 36, column 1, after the word "tissue," insert the words "the lb."

In page 19, lines 37 and 38, column 1, leave out the words "made from imported noils," and insert the words "the lb."

In page 19, line 39, column 1, after the word "case," insert the words "the lb.'

In page 20, column 2, leave out lines 1 to 3, inclusive.

In page 20, line 4, column 1, after the word "Silk," insert the words

"Single yarn made from staple fibre or other waste. … the lb. 9d.

In page 20, line 6, column 2, leave out "1s. 7d".

In page 20, line 6, at the end, insert the words

If made from staple fibre or other waste. … the lb. 10d.

In any other case. … the lb. 1s. 7d.

In page 20, line 8, column 1, after the word "waste," insert the words "the lb."

In page 20, line 12, column 1, after the word "silk," insert the words "the lb."—[Mr. Churchill]

Mr. CHURCHILL: I beg to move, in page 20, line 13, column 1, to leave out the word "Articles," and to insert instead thereof the words
Goods not previously specified in this part of this Schedule.

Captain BENN: I just desire to say that these new Amendments deal with drawbacks, and the facts are that the drawback system in this Act will not work. The second fact is that the Chancellor of the Exchequer cannot come to any understanding with the trade as to drawbacks, particularly on made-up articles. The third point is that I understand some new Schedule is to be given to the trade, and I would like know whether it is to be done under regulations or by further Amendments to the Act.

Mr. CHURCHILL: This is a mere drafting Amendment, to avoid confusion. In these circumstances I am sure the hon. and gallant Member would not wish me to use this as a vehicle for rebutting his utterly unfounded assertions.

Mr. MacDONALD: Does the Government propose to make further Amendments to this on the Report stage?

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir; but I cannot absolutely engage that some very small or minor Amendment may not be necessary. In substance this embodies the whole of our plan. If there should be any Amendment, it would be of a very small character. I might conceivably make the Amendment which arises out of the proposals made by the hon. Member for Middlesbrough earlier in the evening on the point connected with the importation of noil tissues. There might be a slight definition; otherwise, there is nothing affecting our policy.

Captain BENN: A little information would go a great deal further than a little rhetoric. The trade is very much concerned, particularly those who trade in made-up goods; and I would ask the Chancellor of the Exchequer this question: The proposals he made yesterday morning for making a new scheme under which they shall receive drawbacks—how is he going to make it operative? Is it to be by special regulations, or is it going in some way to come into the Bill? That is a question of moment which calls for more than a mere gibe.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendments made:

In page 20, line 19, column 2, leave out the word "paid," and insert the words "payable on the same weight of the like goods."

6.0 A.M.

In page 21, after line 2, insert
1. In calculating for the purpose of any duty or drawback the weight of any yarn or tissue the weight of any fibres other than silk or artificial silk or of any water-proofing materials in the yarn or tissue shall be excluded, and where any drawback is payable in respect of any silk yarn or tissue which is loaded, the amount of the drawback shall be reduced by thirty per cent., unless the Commissioners are satisfied that the yarn or tissue was imported in the form of yarn or tissue, as the case may be, and was loaded at the time of being so imported or was manufactured in Great Britain or Northern Ireland.

In page 21, line 12, at the end, insert
4. Where any article chargeable under this Schedule with a duty equal to a percentage of the value of the article is also chargeable with the duty on lace imposed by this Act the value of the lace in the article shall be excluded in computing the value of the article for the purpose of the duty under this Schedule, and where any article chargeable with duty under this Schedule as a tissue is also chargeable with the duty on lace imposed by this Act, the duty under this Schedule shall not be charged except in so far as the amount thereof exceeds the amount of the lace duty.

In page 21, line 27, at the end, insert the words,
and that the articles have been duly exported as merchandise or shipped for use as stores.

In page 21, line 27, at the end, insert
7. No drawback shall be payable under this Schedule in respect of any article unless the Commissioners are satisfied that it has not been used or, in the case of an article of clothing, that it has not been used otherwise than as a model for trade exhibition."—[Mr. Churchill].

Captain BENN: I beg to move in page 21, line 37, to leave out from the second word "silk" to the end of the paragraph.
Under paragraph 7 the Commissioners may make regulations requiring persons to furnish information, and if they do not furnish the information they can be fined £50. It is impossible for a trader to know all about certain articles, and for that reason I submit this Amendment. But I do not desire my Amendment to prevent the Commissioners making inquiries. Perhaps on this occasion I may be graciously favoured with an utterance from the Front Bench.

Mr. CHURCHILL: The Schedule in this instance only follows the usual form. Unhappily, in many Acts of Parliament a suspicion of compulsion must lurk in the background. These provisions are not enforced against unintentional mistakes or against people who have not shown negligence or any other fault of technical breach.

Major CRAWFURD: Cannot the right hon. Gentleman make it more definite and insert the work "knowingly." It is very broad now. It does not say the manufacturer of the goods or the one handling the goods.

Mr. CHURCHILL: No, Sir. I cannot introduce the word "knowingly" or make other alteration without having an opportunity to consider what would be the effect of the alteration.

Major CRAWFURD: I was asking the right hon. Gentleman if he would consider it?

Mr. CHURCHILL: I cannot undertake to make the alteration without conferring with legal authority as to the effect of inserting words of that kind.

Amendment negatived.

Further Amendment made: In page 21, line 42, leave out the word "having", and insert "have."—[Mr. Churchill.]

Schedule, as amended, ordered to be the Second Schedule of the Bill.

Division No. 190.]
AYES.
[6.10 a.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Courthope, Lieut.-Col. Sir George L.
Gunston, Captain D. W.


Allen, J. Sandeman (L'pool, W. Derby)
Craig, Capt. Rt. Hon. C. C. (Antrim)
Hacking, Captain Douglas H.


Applin, Colonel R. V. K.
Craig, Ernest (Chester, Crewe)
Hammersiey, S. S.


Ashmead-Bartlett, E.
Craik, Rt. Hon. Sir Henry
Hanbury, C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Crookshank, Cpt. H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Harland, A.


Barnett, Major Sir Richard
Curzon, Captain Viscount
Harrison, G. J. C.


Barnston, Major Sir Harry
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hartington, Marquess of


Beamish, Captain T. P. H.
Davies, A. V. (Lancaster, Royton)
Haslam, Henry C.


Betterton, Henry B.
Dean, Arthur Wellesley
Hawke, John Anthony


Bird, E. R. (Yorks, W. R., Skipton)
Doyle, Sir N. Grattan
Headlam, Lieut.-Colonel C. M.


Bird, Sir R. B. (Wolverhampton, W.)
Drewe, C.
Henderson, Capt. R. R. (Oxf'd, Henley)


Blundell, F. N.
Eden, Captain Anthony
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hennessy, Major J. R. G.


Bridgeman, Rt. Hon. William Clive
Elliot, Walter E.
Herbert, S. (York, N. R., Scar. & Wh'by)


Briscoe, Richard George
Erskine, James Malcolm Monteith
Hilton, Cecil


Brittain, Sir Harry
Evans, Captain A. (Cardiff, South)
Holbrook, Sir Arthur Richard


Brocklebank, C. E. R.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Hope, Capt. A. O. J. (Warw'k, Nun.)


Broun-Lindsay, Major H.
Fanshawe, Commander G. D.
Hopkins, J. W. W.


Brown, Brig.-Gen. H. C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Fermoy, Lord
Howard, Captain Hon. Donald


Burman, J. B.
Fielden, E. B.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)


Butler, Sir Geoffrey
Fleming, D. P.
Huntingfield, Lord


Campbell, E. T.
Foxcroft, Captain C. T.
Hutchinson, G. A. Clark (Midl'n & P'b'ls)


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth. S.)
Fraser, Captain Ian
Iliffe, Sir Edward M.


Chadwick, Sir Robert Burton
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Inskip, Sir Thomas Walker H.


Chapman, Sir S.
Ganzoni, Sir John
Jacob, A. E.


Charteris, Brigadier-General J.
Gee, Captain R.
King, Captain Henry Douglas


Christie, J. A.
Gibbs, Col. Rt. Hon. George Abraham
Lamb, J. Q.


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Gilmour, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Sir John
Loder, J. de V.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Luce, Major-Gen. Sir Richard Harman


Cochrane, Commander Hon. A. D.
Goff, Sir Park
Lumley, L. R.


Colfox, Major Wm. Phillips
Gower, Sir Robert
Lynn, Sir Robert J.


Cope, Major William
Grotrian, H. Brent
Macdonald, R. (Glasgow, Cathcart)

Third Schedule agreed to.

Orders of the Day — FOURTH SCHEDULE.

SCALE OF RATES OF ESTATE DUTY.

Mr. DALTON: I beg to move in page 24, line 16, to leave out "£100" and to insert instead thereof "£250."
In view of the very great forbearance many Members have shown in allowing highly objectionable Amendments to go through without a division, I hope the Chancellor, with the dawn of this morning, will gracefully make this concession. The effect of the Amendment is to exempt from Estate Duty estates up to £250. So far as I can judge from the statistics published for Inland Revenue, the cost of this concession would be not more than £100,000.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Very small estates are subject to a very little duty. They cannot be said to pay excessive tribute The cost of the proposal would not be less than £70,000, and although I would gladly dispense with that revenue if it were in my power to do so, I do not think I should do it on the ground suggested by my hon. Friend. I am afraid I must refuse the Amendment.

Question put, "That '£100' stand part of the Schedule."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 161; Noes, 72.

Macintyre, Ian
Power, Sir John Cecil
Strickland, Sir Gerald


Macmillan, Captain H.
Pownall, Lieut.-Colonel Assheton
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


MacRobert, Alexander M.
Radford, E. A.
Styles, Captain H. Walter


Maitland, Sir Arthur D. Steel-
Reid, Capt. A. S. C. (Warrington)
Sugden, Sir Wilfrid


Manningham-Buller, Sir Mervyn
Rhys, Hon. C. A. U.
Tasker, Major R. Inigo


Merriman, F. B.
Roberts, Samuel (Hereford, Hereford)
Thomson, F. C. (Aberdeen, South)


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. B. M.
Ruggles-Brise, Major E. A.
Tinne, J. A.


Moore-Brabazon, Lieut.-Col. J. T. C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Morrison-Bell, Sir Arthur Clive
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Watson, Sir F. (Pudsey and Otley)


Nail, Lieut.-Colonel Sir Joseph
Sandeman, A. Stewart
Watts, Dr. T.


Nelson, Sir Frank
Sanders, Sir Robert A.
Wells, S. R.


Neville, R. J.
Sassoon, Sir Philip Albert Gustave D.
Williams, Com. C. (Devon, Torquay)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Shaw, R. G. (Yorks, W.R., Sowerby)
Wilson, R. R. (Stafford, Lichfield)


Nicholson, O. (Westminster)
Shaw, Lt.-Col. A. D. Mel. (Renfrew, W)
Windsor Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Nuttall, Ellis
Shaw, Capt. W. W. (Wilts., Westb'y)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


O'Neill, Major Rt. Hon. Hugh
Shepperson, E. W.
Wise, Sir Fredric


Penny, Frederick George
Slaney, Major P. Kenyon
Wood, B. C. (Somerset, Bridgwater)


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Sprot, Sir Alexander
Wood, E. (Chest'r, Stalyb'ge & Hyde)


Peto, G. (Somerset, Frome)
Stanley, Col. Hon. G.F. (Will'sden, E)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Pielou, D. P.
Stanley, Hon. O. F. G. (Westm'land)
Lord Stanley and Captain Margesson.


Pilcher, G.
Stott, Lieut.-Colonel W. H.





NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hirst, G. H.
Scurr, John


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Sitch, Charles H.


Alexander, A. V. (Sheffield, Hillsbro')
Hudson, J. H. (Huddersfield)
Slesser, Sir Henry H.


Ammon, Charles George
Hutchison, Sir Robert (Montrose)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Barr, J.
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Stamford, T. W.


Benn, Captain Wedgwood (Leith)
Johnston, Thomas (Dundee)
Stephen, Campbell


Broad, F. A.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Sutton, J. E.


Buchanan, G.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Tinker, John Joseph


Cape, Thomas
Jones, T. I. Mardy (Pontypridd)
Varley, Frank B.


Charleton, H. C.
Kelly, W. T.
Wallhead, Richard C.


Cowan, D. M. (Scottish Universities)
Kennedy, T.
Warne, G. H.


Crawfurd, H. E.
Kirkwood, D.
Watson. W. M. (Dunfermline)


Dalton, Hugh
Lawson, John James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Day, Colonel Harry
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Aberavon)
Webb, Rt. Hon. Sidney


Duckworth, John
Mackinder, W.
Welsh, J. C.


Gibbins, Joseph
MacLaren, Andrew
Westwood, J.


Gillett, George M.
Maxton, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Morris, R. H.
Williams, C. P. (Denbigh, Wrexham)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Murnin, H.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Grundy, T. W.
Oliver, George Harold
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Paling, W.
Windsor, Walter


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)



Hardie, George D.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hayday, Arthur
Potts, John S.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)



Henderson, T. (Glasgow)
Robinson, W. C. (Yorks, W.R., Elland)

Fourth Schedule agreed to.

Fifth Schedule agreed to.

Bill reported; as amended, to be considered upon Monday next, and to be printed. [Bill 198.]

Orders of the Day — ELECTRICITY (SUPPLY) ACTS.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the burgh of Crieff, in the county of Perth, which was presented on the 5th day of May, 1925, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the urban district of Preesall, in the county palatine of Lancaster, which was presented on the 6th day of May, 1925, be approved.

Resolved,
That the Special Order made by the Electricity Commissioners under the Electricity (Supply) Acts, 1882 to 1922, and confirmed by the Minister of Transport under the Electricity (Supply) Act, 1919, in respect of the borough of Wokingham, in the county of Berks, which was presented on the 28th day of April, 1925, be approved."—[Lieut.-Colonel Moore-Brabazon.]

Orders of the Day — INDIAN AFFAIRS.

Ordered, That Major-General Sir Alfred Knox be added to the Committee. [Colonel Gibbs.]

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after half-past Eleven of the Clock upon Wednesday evening, Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Twenty-three Minutes after Six o'Clock, a.m.